Thomas M.

Turner

Fundamentals nf
Hydraulic
Dredging
Second Edition
Historic gathering of three large U.S. Army Corps Hopper dredges—McFarland, Wheeler, and
Essayons—to perform emergency dredging on the lower Mississippi in July 1995. Courtesy: U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
Thomas M. Turner

Fundamentals of
Hydraulic
Dredging
Second Edition

Published by
ASCE Press
American Society of Civil Engineers
1801 Alexander Bell Drive
Reston, Virginia 20191-4400
ABSTRACT

This fully revised and updated edition presents the basic principles of hydraulic
dredging in terms that are easily understood. It is non-theoretical and readable, in
addition to being one of the most widely used texts available on dredging. The
author, Thomas M. Turner, is a respected expert who has made substantial contri-
butions to the field. The book is intended for dredge operators, along with govern-
ment agencies and members of the legal profession who are concerned with the
dredging industry. This updated edition includes new information on significant
technical advances and environmental issues, and also includes both standard and
metric units of measurement.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Turner, Thomas M., 1922-
Fundamentals of hydraulic dredging / Thomas M. Turner. — 2nd ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-7844-0147-0
1. Dredging. 2. Dredges. I. Title.
TC187.T87 1996 95-53878
627'.73—dc20 CIP

The material presented in this publication has been prepared in accor-

dance with generally recognized engineering principles and practices, and is for
general information only. This information should not be used without first secur-
ing competent advice with respect to its suitability for any general or specific appli-
cation.
The contents of this publication are not intended io be and should not
be construed to be a standard of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
and are not intended for use as a reference in purchase specifications, contracts,
regulations, statutes, or any other legal document.
No reference made in this publication to any specific method, product,
process or service constitutes or implies an endorsement, recommendation, or
warranty thereof by ASCE.
ASCE makes no representation or warranty of any kind, whether
express or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, suitability or utility of
any information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this publication, and
assumes no liability therefore.
Anyone utilizing this information assumes all liability arising from such
use, including but not limited to infringement of any patent or patents.

Photocopies. Authorization to photocopy material for internal or personal use

under circumstances not falling within the fair use provisions of the Copyright Act
is granted by ASCE to libraries and other users registered with the Copyright
Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Service, provided that the base
fee of $4.00 per article plus $.25 per page is paid directly to CCC, 222 Rosewood
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. The identification for ASCE Books is 0-7844-0147-
0/96 $4.00 + $.25 per page. Requests for special permission or bulk copying
should be addressed to Permissions & Copyright Dept., ASCE.

Copyright © 1996 by the American Society of Civil Engineers,

All Rights Reserved.
Library of Congress Catalog Card No: 95-53878
ISBN 0-7844-0147-0
Manufactured in the United States of America.

First edition published by Cornell Maritime Press, Inc. 1984.

Printed on recycled paper. 85% recovered fiber and 15% post-consumer waste.
 Dedication

to June
best friend, critic, advisor
& dear wife
 ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Thomas M. Turner, an honors graduate in engineering from North

Carolina State University, served as naval engineering officer
aboard landing craft in World War II. Since then he has worked
in engineering and development for the Procter and Gamble
Company, as chief engineer of the Buckeye Cotton Oil Company,
and as head of the equipment department for Charmin Paper. In
1966 Turner began work as vice president of engineering for the
Ellicott Machine Corporation, the oldest and largest builders of
dredges in the United States, and became general manager of the
Ellicott Dredge Division. In 1978 he established his own consult-
ing firm, specializing in dredge efficiency, trouble-shooting, train-
ing seminars, and litigation assistance. He is a contributor to the
Proceedings of the World Dredging Conference and to other pro-
fessional journals.
 CONTENTS

PREFACE XI

Part I: Theories of Dredging

1. HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED 3
Introduction to Dredge Hydraulics — Velocity Head —
Centrifugal Pump Principle — Pump Affinity Laws —
Specific Gravity Effect — Slurry Effect — Pump Head
Efficiency Coefficients

2. PRODUCTION RATE CALCULATION 15

Dredge Law I — Production Equation — Porosity,
Weights, Specific Gravity — Production Measurement
Systems — Volume to Weight Conversion — Grams per
Liter Conversion

3. DREDGE EFFICIENCY 25
Dredge Law II — Maximum Percent Solids Vs. Cavitation —
Operating Time Vs. Downtime — Dredge Efficiency Chart —
Swing Width Effect — Definition and Calculation — Dredge
Law I Rephrased

4. HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT FACTORS 32

Dredge Law III — Turbulence Requirement for Hy-
draulic Transport — Suction Velocity — Turbulence Re-
quirements of Different Materials — Velocity Require-
ments of Different Pipe Sizes — Soil Classification
via FUNDAMENTALS OF HYDRAULIC DREDGING

5. MAXIMUM DREDGE PRODUCTION 41

Dredge Law IV — Barometric Head Induces Flow —
Dredge Flow Varies with Suction Line Velocity and
Area— Effect of Altitude on Velocity— Effect of Altitude
and Temperature on Horsepower

6. THE SUCTION LINE AND DIGGING DEPTH 49

Dredge Law V — Analysis of Suction Line Losses — Ve-
locity Head — Entrance Loss — Friction Loss — Specific
Gravity Head — Suction Lift — Optimizing Suction Velocity

7. HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH 56

Dredge Law VI — Horsepower Vs. GPM, SG, and h —
Pipeline Size Vs. Friction— hF Vs. GPM and Pipe
Diameter — Effect of Suction Size on Pumping Distance —
Horsepower Vs. Line Size (Horsepower Coefficient) —
Recommended Pump Horsepower

8. PRODUCTION CHARTS 69
Dredge Law VII — Barometric, Torque, and Velocity
Limitations on Production — Suction Line Size — Dis-
charge Line Size — Booster Pump Effect — Ladder Pump
Effect

9. THE DREDGE CYCLE 82

Head-Capacity Curve on Water — System Resistance on
Water — Head-Capacity Curve on Slurry — System Re-
sistance on Slurry — Dredge Cycle Explained

10. FLOW REGIME AND FRICTION 87

Friction Head Losses — Flow Regimes — Soil Types —
Hazen-Williams Equation — Friction — Factor Chart

11. CAVITATION: CAUSES AND AVOIDANCE 94

Definition— Captation Chart— Eye Speed— NPSHR—
Impeller Geometry and Speed

Part II: Dredging in Practice

12. SELECTING THE DREDGE TYPE 101

Plain Suction—Trailing Suction—Cutterhead—Com-
pensated Cutterhead Dredge
CONTENTS IX

13. THE CUTTER 113

Types and Functions — The Basket Cutter — The Bucket
Wheel— The Endless Chain— The High Speed Disc
Cutter

14. THE DREDGE PUMP 137

Pump Type — Particle Clearance — Fully Lined Vs. Par-
tially Lined Pump— Impeller— Stuffing Box— Shaft and
Bearings — Ao^justable Mounting — Wiper Vanes —
Casing — Eye Speed — Tip Speed — Eye Diameter Vs. Im-
peller Diameter — Horsepower Coefficient — Drive —
Torsional Vibration — Thrust

15. LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS 159

Ladder or Submerged Pump — Design Requirements for
Ladder Pumps — Suction Jet Booster — Natural Gas
Problems — Ladder Pump Drives — Booster Pumps Vs.
Transport Distance — Coordination with Dredge
Pump — Water Hammer — Location of Booster

16. WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES 173

Life Vs. Wear— Life Equation— The K Factor— Hy-
draulic Design Factor — The Brinriell Hardness Factor —
Solids Concentration — Pump Size — Velocity — Weight of
Solids — Particle Size — Angularity — Application of the
Life Equation — Simplified Pipeline Life Equation — Normal
Range Validity — Pressure — Corrosion — Wear Zones

17. AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 185

Forward Winch — Swing Speed — Line Pull — Anchors —
Anchor Booms — Spud Hoist Winches — Spuds — Spud
Carriage — Wire Rope

18. INSTRUMENTATION AND AUTOMATIC CONTROL 199

Definitions — Durability — Accuracy — Dredge Position —
Slurry System — Dredge Cycle Automation — Cutter
Module — Digging Depth — Sounding — Winches

19. CALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 208

Contract Document Evaluation — Method of Calculation —
Material to Be Pumped — Digging Depth — Terminal
Elevation— Discharge Line Length— Cutter Capability-
Height of Work Face — Swing Width — Type of Advancing
Mechanism — Dredge Efficiency — Suction Line Size —
Hourly Production Rate Vs. Production Time — Total Yards —
Production Time — Calendar Time — Trash Vs. Production
Time — Costs — Bid Price
X FUNDAMENTALS OF HYDRAULIC DREDGING

20. THE PERSONAL COMPUTER IN DREDGE 220

MANAGEMENT
Need — Software — Data Base — Accuracy — "D" Vs. "L"
Dredges — PC Program Output — Simulation — Training —
Computer Advantages

21. OPERATION AND TROUBLESHOOTING 229

Operational Errors and How to Avoid Them — Swing
Angle for Advance — Swing Width — Anchor Location —
Channel Width Limitations — Troubleshooting — Ab-
normal Gauge Readings and Their Meaning

22. THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE DREDGE 239

Environmentalists Vs. Developers — Water Pollution
Denned — Politics and Public Opinion — Turbidity —
Dredge As Cleanup Tool — Efficiency Vs. Environmental
Disruption — Recommendations

ABBREVIATIONS 245
USEFUL FORMULAS AND CONVERSION FACTORS 247
REFERENCES 249
PUBLIC LAW 95-269 250
INDEX 255
 PREFACE

This book is intended as a handbook for all involved with hydraulic

dredges, be they owners, managers, engineers, levermen, or law-
yers. It is simply phrased, and its fundamental truths are intended
to guide the way to efficient, economic operation of the hydraulic
dredge; it is also potentially helpful to the resolution of contract
disputes, including litigation.
The Basic Dredge Laws of the first book are repeated in this
second edition. As fundamental truths, they have stood the test of
time, and provide a sound foundation on which to build one's
knowledge of hydraulic dredge rheology. The charts and data from
the first edition have been updated, improved, and simplified, but
the fundamentals, while embellished, remain unchanged. An un-
derstanding of these fundamentals can steer the dredge operator
away from the erroneous beliefs and practices of the past. The
industry is still afflicted by some persistent myths, which hopefully
this book will help to dispel. One myth, accepted for decades, is
that solids suspended in liquids can not absorb, store, or transmit
pressure energy. The Texas A&M University Center for Dredging
Studies demonstrated the error of this statement with a simple
laboratory apparatus. A tall, transparent cylinder filled with a sand
and water mixture indicated a static pressure equal to the water
height when the sand was motionless at the bottom of the cylinder;
however, when the cylinder was inverted, the static pressure reg-
istered a higher value until the sand again settled on the bottom.
Suspended solids can obviously convert their kinetic energy into
pressure, although the conversion is not as efficient as that of a
true (Newtonian) fluid.
Xll FUNDAMENTALS OF HYDRAULIC DREDGING

The preface of the first edition of this book (1984) commented

on the scarcity of technical literature regarding the subject of hy-
draulic dredging. Today, this situation is much improved. While the
industry's authors are not yet prolific, the World Dredging Associ-
ation, the Texas A&M University Center for Dredging Studies, the
American Society of Civil Engineers and others have succeeded in
encouraging publications that have contributed significantly to the
technical progress of this essential industry; however, an appraisal
of the industry's equipment would undoubtedly reveal that much
of it lags behind the literature. Old inefficient designs remain, com-
ponent configurations are inappropriate, and few prime movers are
matched properly with their dredge pumps. Obviously, the educa-
tion of the dredging industry needs to continue.
There are reasons for the industry's shortcomings. First, it is
small, without the financial clout to support the fundamental R&D
effort required to keep up-to-date in this fast-changing, technical
world. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, through its developmen-
tal arm, the Waterways Experiment Station (WES) in Vicksburg,
Miss., spends substantial funds on dredging activities; however,
WES is a public institution and necessarily responds to political
pressures. Environmental concerns, highly politicized, have
claimed the lion's share of WES's attention, leaving only minor
resources for equipment development. The annual cost of the U.S.
waterways' dredging program, as managed by the Corps, is directly
related to the efficiency of the U.S. dredging industry. Army Corps
development improving this efficiency could lead to a reduction in
the nation's dredging costs and thus justify itself. There are several
development projects worthy of WES's attention.
In addition to WES and the Center for Dredging Studies, other
organizations have contributed to the industry's knowledge. Vari-
ous equipment manufacturers have helped—for example, GIW In-
dustries with its large pump-testing facility, and Ellicott Machine
Corporation with its versatile dredge-simulation facility. There is
information in this book that has been derived from each of the
four organizations mentioned, but there is still much to do to meet
the needs of the industry. Frequently we must "make do" with the
best information available, even when we question its adequacy.
The author has included charts in this book for which he would
like additional data. For example, the Chapter 1 chart showing the
coefficient for pump-head efficiency (Che) and the Chapter 13
PREFACE Xlll

chart showing cutter capacity have been developed from limited

data. They have been used with success, but the author would
gratefully accept confirming or corrective data from other sources.
Even though the charts are not fully validated in their present form,
they represent much better data than was previously available to
the author.
The industry has been slow in utilizing the personal computer
(PC) to optimize the design and operation of hydraulic dredges.
Seldom has there been an industry more needful of the capabilities
of the PC. When one considers the project variables encountered
by the hydraulic dredge (channel width, depth, line length, terminal
elevation, dredged material characteristics), plus the dredge design
variables (suction and discharge line size, pump RPM and horse-
power, tip speed, eye speed, advance mechanism), the numerous
possible combinations become apparent, and the need for a PC
with appropriate software becomes obvious. It is hard to overem-
phasize the value of having an electronic simulation of a dredge
available on the manager's desk for analysis of any project. Prompt
answers are available to questions such as "What effect will adding
40 feet of terminal elevation to the discharge line have on produc-
tion rate?" or "What effect will changing digging depth (or line
length, or dredged materials) have on production costs?" The in-
ability to answer such questions accurately has plagued the indus-
try, leading to failed projects and bankrupt companies. Hopefully
this book will encourage dredge operators to utilize this modern
tool; those that do not will surely not be able to compete with those
that do.
There are still newcomers to the industry who underestimate
the complexity of dredge hydraulics. Operators who feel the dredge
is "just a barge with a pump on it" contribute to the high bank-
ruptcy rate in the industry. They observe a dredge and see the hull,
winches, spuds, cutter, and pump, and conclude the dredge is no
more complicated than much of the equipment used in the con-
struction industry. This observation overlooks the complexity of
the primary function of the dredge: the hydraulic transport of sol-
ids. This book is devoted largely to the explanation of that com-
plicated, multifaceted process that goes on inside the dredge pump
and the opaque dredge pipe. It is intended to make available to
dredge operators not only the fundamentals of hydraulic dredging,
but also a practical approach to a successful, economical operation.
xiv FUNDAMENTALS OF HYDRAULIC DREDGING

A two-step program to assure a company's technical success

with its hydraulic dredges is to (1) disseminate the fundamentals
of this book throughout the company; and (2) utilize a personal
computer with effective software to simulate the characteristics of
each company dredge and each project parameter. Checking the
project conditions against the design characteristics of the dredge
with a desktop computer can lead the way to a successful field
operation, avoiding the disastrous economic results of an inade-
quate dredge on a difficult project.
The second edition of this book, unlike the first, uses both the
British/American and metric systems of measurement. A European
critic wrote a complimentary review of the first edition, but pro-
nounced it unfortunate that the book used only the B/A system.
The American industry has not yet completed its conversion to the
International System (SI) of units; however, a 1994 decree by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requires use of the SI system on
future federal projects. Therefore, while this book uses the British/
American system, it also provides parallel metric units to broaden
its usefulness, both in the U.S. and abroad.
Public Law 95-269, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1978, rep-
resents a significant event in the history of the U.S. dredging in-
dustry. This act limited the in-house dredging fleet of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, as well as its direct dredging of public waters;
in effect, it enfranchised the private industry to perform the Corps'
routine dredging projects on the nation's waterways as long as the
quoted price was no more than 25% above the Corps' estimate. The
law has had a dramatic effect on the private industry. A substantial
fleet of privately owned split-hull hopper dredges has been built,
where none existed before. The law is reproduced as an appendix
to this book.
One of the author's most rewarding experiences was the phone
call received from an American dredge operator, who said, "I am
calling to tell you that your book has not only educated us in dredg-
ing fundamentals, but we feel it has actually saved our company."
If the second edition of Fundamentals of Hydraulic Dredging can
continue in this mode, it will be as satisfying to the author as to
the industry.
 PART I
THEORIES OF DREDGING
This page intentionally left blank
 Chapter 1

HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED

INTRODUCTION TO DREDGE HYDRAULICS

The study of the hydraulic dredge system involves an analysis of
a unique application of fluid flow. Although the classic hydraulic
principles apply, in practice, a dredge system is complicated by the
presence of solids which make significant changes in the rheolog-
ical, or flow, characteristics of the liquid.
Water, the normal dredge liquid, is a true (i.e., Newtonian) fluid
which complies with the classic fluid flow principles. However, when
solids are added in the form of sand or other sea-bottom material,
water becomes a slurry with widely fluctuating flow characteristics,
vaiying as a function of the type and percentage of the solids in it.
The student of hydraulic dredging must understand the unique
nature of slurry flow as well as the classic fluid flow principles
since a slurry system is actually a hydraulic transport system for
solids. As applied to a hydraulic dredge, slurry flow is used to trans-
port solids (sea-bottom material) from the cut or channel to the
fill or deposit area.
The hydraulic dredge is a floating machine which removes sea-
bottom material by entraining it in induced water flow, and trans-
ports it in a closed conduit to a designated deposit area. While
there are several versions of the hydraulic dredge, e.g., plain suc-
tion, cutter head, hopper, and dust pan, they all comply with the
principles outlined in this book.

VELOCITY HEAD, hv
One of the most important concepts of dredge hydraulics for the
dredgeman to understand fully is that of velocity head. As defined,
4 THEORIES OF DREDGING

velocity head is the vertical distance through which a liquid would

have to fall to attain a given velocity, and as implied, it relates
available head to resulting velocity or vice versa. Since velocity
head, hv, is involved in nearly every aspect of fluid flow calcula-
tions, whether it be entrance loss, pipeline friction, or pump design,
it does require that the prospective dredgeman master the theory
behind it as well as its practical applications. Velocity head is the
basic building block in the calculation of any fluid flow system, and
can be expressed as follows:

Or: velocity head equals velocity squared divided by two

times the acceleration of gravity.

This expression can be rearranged as follows:

Here it is apparent that to induce a velocity of V, a head of h feet

of a liquid is required, and is related to V as the square root of the
product of h and two times the acceleration of gravity. Head, hv
(or pressure, if preferred), is expressed in feet of liquid being
pumped. If the liquid is water with specific gravity (SG) of 1.0, the
conversion to pounds per square inch (psi) is simple. One cubic
foot of fresh water weighs 62.4 pounds. See Fig. 1-1. Obviously the
height of the water column in the cube is one foot. Therefore, the
head at the bottom of the cube is one foot. The area of the bottom
of the cube is 12 inches times 12 inches which equals 144 square
inches, and since the total weight of the water is 62.4 pounds, the

Fig. 1-1. Head, 1 cubic foot of fresh water.

HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED 5

unit pressure on the bottom of the cube is:

Therefore, 1 foot of water head equals 0.433 psi, and 10 feet equals
4.33 psi.
If a fluid other than water is being pumped, the equivalent head
in water is calculated by the simple multiplication of the fluid head
by its specific gravity. For example, if a slurry of 1.4 specific gravity
has a velocity head of 5 feet, the water equivalent is 5 X 1.4 = 7.0
feet. This is a very useful concept for the dredgeman since feet of
water is easy to measure and conceive; also, the natural barometric
head (the source of pump suction head) is 34 feet of water, which
corresponds to 30 inches of mercury and 14.7 psi. The dredgeman
should recognize that head is normally expressed in feet of liquid,
and pressure in psi, but each is easily convertible into the other.
Velocity is expressed in feet per second, a commonly under-
stood expression. But, not so commonly understood is acceleration
which measures the change in velocity. If velocity is increasing by
1 foot per second each second, then the expression becomes 1 foot
per second, per second. Although this may sound redundant to the
layman, acceleration is expressed in feet per second, per second
(ft/sec/sec) since velocity is increased by one foot per second every
second.
The velocity head concept is so important to the dredgeman
that the derivation of the expression hv = V2/2g can provide worth-
while insights. Assume that a free-falling body falls from a head of
h. See Fig. 1-2.
The acceleration of gravity at sea level, g, is measured as 32.2
ft/sec/sec. A falling body encountering negligible resistance will in-
crease its velocity by 32.2 ft/sec every second it is falling freely.
Expressed in equation form, this is:
V = gt [Equation 1-3]
Where V = the instantaneous velocity
g = the acceleration of gravity (32.2 ft/sec/sec)
t = time in seconds the body falls
Therefore, if the body starts at zero velocity, after one second it
reaches 32.2 feet per second; after two seconds, 64.4 feet per sec-
ond, and the table below can be extrapolated as far as desired.
6 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 1-2. Free-falling body.

Instantaneous Velocity Average Velocity

Time-seconds ft/sec m/s ft/sec m/s
0 0 0 0 0
1 32.2 9.8 16.1 4.9
2 64.4 19.6 32.2 9.8
3 96.6 29.4 48.3 14.7
4 128.8 39.3 64.4 19.6
The velocity derived from Equation 1-2 is the instantaneous
velocity achieved after the elapsed time. It is not the average ve-
locity of the falling body which started at zero. With constant ac-
celeration, the average velocity is the initial velocity zero plus the
final, or instantaneous, velocity divided by two.

In order to determine the distance, h, a body falls in the elapsed

time, t, we multiply the average velocity by time.

So the distance, h, a body falls freely can be calculated simply by

knowing the time it falls, using Equation 1-3 to obtain V and Equa-
tion 14 to obtain h. If we do not know time but do know either
distance or velocity, we can calculate the unknown factor. From
Equation 1-3 we know V = gt which, expressed in terms of time,
becomes t = V/g. Now substituting V/g for t in Equation 14, we get:
HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED 7

This is the classic velocity head expression. Expressed in terms of

velocity it becomes:

a very useful equation for calculating velocity when only h is

known.
What does this simple physics lesson have to do with hydraulic
dredge principles? The dredgeman should know that a true fluid
(called a Newtonian fluid in honor of Sir Isaac Newton who ex-
pounded the law of gravity) acts in accordance with the laws for
a free-falling body. If, instead of a free-falling body as indicated in
Fig. 1-2, we have a tank with a height of liquid, h, and an open
nozzle at the bottom, Fig. 1-3, the fluid will flow through the nozzle
in accordance with the velocity head expression, Equation 1-1 and
Equation 1-2. Note that if h equals 4 feet in Fig. 1-3, the velocity at
the nozzle will be:

Also, if we know that the velocity at the nozzle is 16 ft/sec, we can

calculate the head creating the velocity as follows:

WATER LEVEL

Fig. 1-3. Flow through nozzle.

8 THEORIES OF DREDGING

The simple physical concept of velocity head is that it is the feet

of head required to produce a given velocity. In the example above,
4 feet of head is required to produce a velocity of 16 feet per
second.
Doubling the head available will not double the velocity since
velocity varies as the square root of the head available. The follow-
ing equations show that the effect on velocity when the head is
first doubled and then quadrupled.
V = V2gh = V2 X 32.2 X 8 = 22.7 ft/sec = 6.9 m/s
V = V2gh = V2 X 32.2 X 16 = 32 ft/sec = 9.75 m/s
Note that when the head is quadrupled, in the second example
above, the velocity is doubled. We can predict this readily by rec-
ognizing the square root relationship of h to V.

CENTRIFUGAL PUMP PRINCIPLE

For a Newtonian fluid, the effect of the velocity head equation is
completely reversible. Not only will 4 feet of head create a velocity
of 16 feet per second, but ignoring losses, 16 feet per second ve-
locity entering through the nozzle as shown in Fig. 1-2 will create
a head of 4 feet in the tank.
It is from the reversible nature of velocity head that the prin-
ciple of the centrifugal dredge pump is derived. By rotating the
vanes of the impeller through the fluid in the pump, the fluid is
centrifugally impelled into the volute (casing) of the pump where
most of the velocity is converted into pressure or head as a func-
tion of the velocity head expression. See Fig. 1-4.

Fig. 1-4. Centrifugal pump with velocity components.

HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED 9

The remainder of the velocity energy imparted to the fluid is

utilized to maintain the velocity through the pump and to overcome
the flow losses through the pump. Surprisingly, the head achieved
is generally something more than the velocity head calculated from
the tip speed of the impeller. This is because the fluid achieves
velocities higher than the impeller tip speed since the fluid must
flow both circumferentially with the impeller and radially out into
the volute, providing a resultant velocity higher than either com-
ponent. See Fig. 1-4.
The head created by a pump has a fixed relationship to the
flow rate through the pump at a given rotational speed. This rela-
tionship is generally determined by test and is graphically indicated
by the head capacity chart or characteristic curve for the pump,
Fig. 1-5. While at the rotational speed for which the curve is plot-
ted, any change in capacity through the pump will result in a
change in head, and vice versa. If either head or capacity is known
along with rotational speed, the other factor can be determined
from the head capacity chart since the pump must follow the fixed
pattern described by the curve.

PUMP AFFINITY LAWS

Normally, the head capacity information is given for several speeds,
along with horsepower and efficiency information. See Fig. 1-6.
However, if only one speed is known, the performance of the pump
at other speeds can be approximated by the use of the Pump Af-
finity Laws indicated as follows:
(1) GPM ~ RPM
(2) h ~ (RPM)2
(3) HP ~ (RPM)3

Fig. 1-5. Centrifugal pump head-capacity curve.

10 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 1-6. Centrifugal pump head-capacity curve. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Ma-
chine Works.

In Pump Affinity Law 1, the GPM impelled into the volute and
out the discharge nozzle increases in direct proportion to the RPM.
In Pump Affinity Law 2, the head increases as the square of the
RPM or impeller tip speed. This reflects the velocity head relation-
ship where V is impeller tip speed.

In Pump Affinity Law 3, HP increases as the cube of the RPM.

Since HP varies with GPM and h, which vary as the first and second
power of RPM respectively, HP varies as the third power.
The affinity laws are also applicable when changing the outside
diameter (OD) of a pump impeller, using tip speed as the deter-
mining factor.
HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED 11

SPECIFIC GRAVITY EFFECT

Curves for dredge pumps produced by their manufacturers are
based on water for testing convenience and for comparison pur-
poses. The purpose of the dredge pump, however, is to pump solids
in slurry form, and the dredgeman should note the significant ef-
fects of replacing water, a true Newtonian fluid, with a slurry.
If we assume the slurry is composed of water and very fine
solid particles so that the fluid performs essentially as a Newtonian
fluid, then the major difference is specific gravity. Furthermore, if
we assume the SG is 1.4 but that viscosity is the same as water,
we can examine the pump head capacity curve and note that it
does not change at all. However, the head capacity curve, which
is identical to that of water, now represents feet of head of a 1.4
SG fluid rather than a 1.0 SG water. If a pressure gauge were on
the discharge line, it would indicate approximately 1.4 times the
pressure of water at the same flow rate. The horsepower curve
would rise by 1.4 times that of water, whereas efficiency would not
be affected, as long as the fluid was Newtonian.
This effect is easily detected in a dredge when the pump which
has been pumping water suddenly receives a heavy slurry. A pres-
sure increase is detected on the dredge discharge gauge, but of
smaller magnitude than the 1.4 change in SG, because as the flow
rate in the discharge line increases, the operating point on the head
capacity curve moves to the right, reducing the head increase. For
a further discussion of this effect, see Chapter 9, the Dredge Cycle.

SLURRY EFFECT
When solids are added to water forming a slurry, the SG is in-
creased over that of water. Therefore, the HP and discharge pres-
sure of the pump are increased, if other factors such as RPM do
not change. Unfortunately, slurries in general are not true fluids
and therefore do not comply fully with the Newtonian laws. The
head and efficiency of the pump on slurries are reduced from that
of water as a function of the nature and percentage of the volume
of the solids in the slurry. The chart, Fig. 1-7, shows the coefficients
to be applied to the water head and efficiency for various sized
solids and percentage of slurries. Note that the pressure generated
12 THEORIES OF DREDGING

PUMP HEAD-EFFIC COEFFICIENTS

Fig. 1-7.

by a slurry is generally higher than for water in spite of the head

reduction. However, the non-Newtonian slurry almost always
makes a significant reduction in pump efficiency when compared
to water.

PUMP HEAD EFFICIENCY COEFFICIENTS

As Fig. 1-7 discloses, the correction coefficient for water (where
SG = 10) is always unity and no correction is needed. The industry
has long recognized that the higher the solids concentration of the
slurry and/or the coarser the solids material, the lower the head-
efficiency coefficient (Che) will be. As the solids percentage and/
or the median grain size (D50) of a slurry is increased, the less the
slurry acts like a Newtonian or true fluid.
There have been wide divergences in the values of Che within
the industry. A comparison of test data on small slurry pumps (4
to 6 inches), with the empirical data for Che within the dredging
industry (10 to 30 inches), has led to the explanation of the diver-
gences. It is true that solids percent and grain size influence Che,
but the magnitude of the effect varies broadly with pump size. For
example, a particle 6.5 inches in diameter will not pass a 10-inch
HYDRAULICS SIMPLIFIED 13

pump with a 6-inch passageway (distance between impeller

shrouds W), but would easily pass a 30-inch pump with an 18-inch
passageway. Similarly, a 5.5-inch particle will pass the 10-inch
pump with difficulty (high losses), but will cause relatively minor
losses when passing the 30-inch pump. Obviously, the median grain
size is not the lone determining factor; however, it is a key factor
in calculating the determining ratio of passageway size to that of
the solids D50 (W/D50)08.
Fig. 1-7 plots a function of the ratio against Che for several
slurry specific gravities. The curves were plotted from valid but
limited test data, and represent the first publication of this data
other than the author's proprietary PC software. The author would
like to see further data to fine-tune the chart; however, the chart
has been used successfully for years, and is offered as a major
improvement over the current, conflicting data of the industry.

SUMMARY
The material presented in this first chapter is intended to familiarize
the reader with the broad principles of fluid flow, the centrifugal
pump, and the effect of slurry on the pump performance. The next
several chapters are devoted to specific hydraulic dredge principles.
Jean Rigal, the first American-built dredge with ladder pump and two dredge pumps. Courtesy:
Ellicott Machine Corporation.
 Chapter 2

PRODUCTION
RATE CALCULATED

D R E D G E LAW I
PRODUCTION VARIES
AS FLOW TIMES AVERAGE PERCENT SOLIDS

The production of a hydraulic dredge is expressed as a quantity of

solids transported. Water is the transport medium and is used to
remove a volume of solids from a channel, or to fill a certain vol-
ume with solids, or both. The weight of the production is a function
of its specific gravity, and is generally incidental to the project
contract. However, since mining dredge operations deal in weight,
weight cannot be ignored, and its effect on dredge production has
to be considered.
The amount of water pumped is usually unimportant to the
person or organization paying for the dredging. Nevertheless, it is
important to the dredge operator who is not reimbursed for the
cost of pumping water and therefore wishes to pump the minimum
amount of water compatible with his production objectives.

PRODUCTION EQUATION
Equation 2-1 shows the simplest form of the production equation
in the B/A system.
cu yd/hr = GPM
X average percent solids X .297 [Equation 2-1}

The solids percent is by in situ volume. The constant of .297 is the

result of combining the factors for converting American GPM to
1 THEORIES OF DREDGING

cu yd/hr as follows:
GPM X 60 min/hr/(7.48 gal/cu ft X 27 cu ft/cu yd) = .297
The following equation applies in the B/A system when calculating
cubic yard per hour using the common dredge terms of inside di-
ameter of pipe in inches, velocity in feet per second, and specific
gravity of slurry:
cu yd/hr = d2 X v X (SG-1) X 661 [Equation 2-2}
This is the convenient equation used by personal computers,
whereas Equation 2-1 is simpler for discussion purposes.
Using Equation 2-1 or 2-2, production rate can be calculated if
the GPM (or velocity) and average percent solids is known. Like-
wise, average percent solids, a very important measure of dredge
efficiency, can be calculated if the velocity and production rate are
known.
Dredge Law I is a fundamental statement that should become
second nature to the dredgeman. Note that if the dredge is able to
hold its GPM constant while doubling its percent solids, the pro-
duction doubles. Likewise, if velocity can be doubled while holding
percent solids constant, the production is doubled. If velocity is
doubled and percent solids halved, production remains the same;
however, if the velocity is halved and the percent solids halved,
then production becomes only 25 percent of what it had been: l/2
X l/2 - 1U or 25 percent.

POROSITY, WEIGHTS, SPECIFIC GRAVITY

The cubic yards per hour in Equation 2-1 is normally based on the
in situ measurement or "as found" volume of material in the cut.
If we assume that the material being pumped is a clean, granular,
silicate sand with a specific gravity of 2.65, the volume of this sand
as found in the cut or channel will be the same as when hydrau-
lically deposited in the fill or deposit area, since clean sand has
essentially a zero swell or shrink factor. However, if clay or other
compacted material is involved, there is a possibility that when
measured in a calibrated canister or in the fill, it will have ex-
panded in volume by 10, 20, 30 percent or more. It is important to
the dredging contract to define clearly whether the unit payment
will be based on cut or fill.
PRODUCTION RATE CALCULATED 17

For the instructional purposes of this book, we will normally

assume a clean sand, although material to be removed from a cut
can vary in specific gravity from slightly above that of water to a
dense material of 2.65 or higher with zero porosity. (Specific gravity
is defined as the ratio of the weight of a given volume of material
to that of water.) Recognition of the nature of the material to be
dredged can make the difference between financial success and
failure of the project. The cost of dredging can vary from cents per
cubic yard for the light material to several dollars for the dense,
hard material.
For a typical granular sand, the porosity approximates 33.3 per-
cent. On the bottom of the waterway, the granules rest on one
another, and the interstices are filled with water. When the sand is
pumped to the fill, the water may drain out, and the interstices
may be filled with air; but the granules still rest on one another
occupying the same space. This means that the weight of a cubic
foot of water-saturated sand is approximately 21 pounds heavier
than a dry cubic foot since the weight of the water is:
0.333 cu ft X 62.4 Ibs/cu ft X SG of 1.0 = 20.8, say 21 Ibs
Also, since the dry solids occupy the remaining 66.7 percent of the
cubic foot, their weight is as follows:
0.667 cu ft X 62.4 Ibs/cu ft X SG of 2.65 = 110.3, say 110 Ibs
When completely wet, i.e., when the interstices are filled with
water, the sand weighs 110 plus 21 of water for a total of 131
pounds. Logically then, a cubic foot of 2.65 SG sand will weigh
anywhere from 110 to 131 pounds as a function of the amount of
water it contains. At 131 Ibs/cu ft
SG = 131/62.4 = 2.1 or 2100 g/l

PRODUCTION MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS

The metric calculation of the above is based on the simple concept
of 1,000 parts in a liter [cubic centimeters (cc)], described in more
detail at the end of the chapter.
Water: 333 cc X 1.0 SG = 333 g/l
Solids: 667 cc X 2.65 SG = 1,767 g/l
Totals: 1,000 cc X 2.1 SG = 2,100 g/l
18 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Note that specific gravity (SG) and grams/liter (g/1) are ways of
expressing the same weight data for the mixture. In the earlier B/A
examples, the 2.1 SG is the same value as 2,100 g/1. The metric
expression is numerically 1,000 times greater than the B/A SG.
Fig. 2-1 discloses the composition and weight of one cubic foot
of slurry for water and a 2.65 SG granular material, varying from zero
percent solids to 100 percent true volume. The formula is as follows:
In situ SG = SG solids X percent + SG water X (1 - percent)
Where percent = percent solids by true volume, and in situ SG =
SG of mixture.
Note in Fig. 2-1 that the 1.5 in situ SG (including the water
content) is the practical maximum percent for hydraulic transport.
The author has observed slurries as high as 1.6 SG, but the flow
regime is unstable and the operator is unable to maintain it; thus
flowing slurries of 2.65 solids are considered to vary from 1.01 to
1.5 SG. Note that the optimum 1.5 SG slurry consists of more solids
by weight than water.
The 2.1 SG is the common condition assumed for 2.65 sands in
their in situ, undredged condition. An in situ SG less than 2.1 sug-
gests a material with organics, muds, or clays with attached water
molecules. Such materials are not uncommon on maintenance jobs,
but require a different production calculation technique reflecting
the lower initial in situ SG.
The 2.65 SG represents the non-granulated, non-porous mate-
rial that would normally be blasted before dredging. So, the oper-
ating dredge would not encounter pump slurries between 1.6 and
2.1, nor pump in situ materials above 2.1.

SPEC GRAU TRUE UOL TRUE UOL INS ITU UOL MIX. UGT SOLIDS UATER GMSxLTR
MIXTURE '/. SOLIDS */. WATER :< SOLIDS LBS/CU FT LBSxCU FT LBSxCU FT SOLIDS
2.65 100.00 0.00 150.00 165.4 165.4 0.0 2650
2. 1 66.67 33.33 100.00 131.0 110.2 20.8 1767
2.0 60.61 39. 3S 90.91 124.8 100.2 24.6 1606
1.9 54.55 45.45 81.82 118.6 90.2 28.4 1445
.8 48.48 51.52 72.73 112.3 80.2 32. 1 1285
.7 42.42 57.58 63.64 106. 1 70.2 35.9 1124
.6 36.36 63.64 54.55 99.8 60. 1 39.7 964
.5 20.30 63.70 45.45 93.6 50. 1 43.5 803
.4 24.24 75.76 36.36 87.4 40. 1 47.3 642
.3 19. 18 91.92 27.27 91. 1 30. 1 51. 1 492
1 25 15. 15 84.85 22.73 78.0 25. 1 52.9 402
.2 12. 12 87.88 18. IS 74.9 20.0 54.8 321
.1 6.06 93.94 9.09 68.6 10.0 58.6 161
1 0.00 100.00 0.00 62.4 0.0 62.4 0

Fig. 2-1.
PRODUCTION RATE CALCULATED 19

In situ volume is the volume as found or transported by the

dredge. It has 33.3 percent voids, and thus normally is found with
a 33.3 percent water volume. The granulated material occupies the
same volume whether the voids are filled with water or air, so this
is the volume with which the dredge project is concerned in both
cut and fill. Att contractual matters deal with the measurable in
situ volume. True volume of a granulated material, i.e., with zero
voids, does not occur in nature, and is not measurable. In situ vol-
ume is 150 percent of the theoretical true volume. The volume of
solid rock, when blasted for dredging, becomes 50 percent greater
as shown in the first row of Fig. 2-2. All calculations and formulas
in this book deal with in situ volume unless indicated otherwise.
Weight of the dredged material is seldom of contractual signif-
icance to the dredgeman since he is normally paid by volume.
Since weight can affect operational results, however, the subject
will be discussed in Chapter 6.
Mining companies and academicians frequently deal in weight,
generally expressed in short tons (2,000 pounds), long or metric
tons (2,204.6 pounds), or gross tons (2,240 pounds). Most dredge-
men use 1.5 short tons or 3,000 pounds as the weight of a cubic
yard of sand. This is a reasonable approximation since the dry
weight of a cubic foot of 2.65 SG sand equals 2,978 pounds (110.3
pounds X 27 cu ft/cu yd).
Following are four convenient production equations, two in the
B/A system and two in the metric system. Note that the average
solids content is used in the mathematical examples that follow
the equations. All examples are for a 20 inch (508 mm) dredge,
with a 15.12 feet per second velocity (14,805 GPM or 4.61 m/s),
slurry SG of 1.25 (.2273 percent solids by volume or 402 g/l), pro-
ducing 999 cu yd/hr (764 m3/hr).
cu yd/hr = GPM X volume percent solids/100 X .297
= 14,805 X .2273 X .297 = 999 [Equation 2-1 B/A]
2
cu yd/hr = d X velocity X (SG-1) X .661
= 202 X 15.12 X .25 X .661 = 999 [Equation 2-2 B/A]
3 3
m /hr = m /sec X g/l X 3.27
= .9341 X 250 X 3.27 = 764 [Equation 2-3 M]
m3/hr = d2 X m/s X g/l X 2.57
= (.508)2 X 4.61 X 250 X 2.57 = 764 [Equation 2-4 M]
20 THEORIES OF DREDGING

A graphical representation of the relationship between slurries

expressed in in situ volume, true volume, and weight is shown in
Fig. 2-2. A study of this graph is recommended in order to com-
prehend the significant differences in the specific gravities of slurry
as expressed in terms of percent solids by weight, in situ volume,
or in true volume. The dredgeman almost always uses in situ vol-
ume, but in mining operations weight may be used. True volume
has little or no significance to the dredgeman since it implies zero
voids which in turn implies large nonporous masses, not adaptable
to hydraulic transport.
Note that in any of the production equations, the percent solids
is always expressed in terms of in situ volume for clean sand, or
any material with the same volume after pumping as before. Vol-
ume is the only physical dimension practical for the dredgeman to
measure. If a typical sample could be obtained from a flowing
slurry and placed in a calibrated canister, the sand would settle to
the bottom and the percent volume could be read at the surface
of the sand. This is the actual volume the sand will occupy when
deposited in the fill, and represents a good indication of the solids
percentage for calculation purposes. Note again that there are 33.3
percent voids in the sand and the in situ, or dredged volume is only

Fig. 2-2. Specific gravity of sand-water slurry vs. percent solids concentration.
PRODUCTION RATE CALCULATED 21

66.7 percent of the "true" volume. (See Fig. 2-2.) It should be noted
that this in situ volume is the actual volume measured by the dred-
geman and is normally the basis upon which he is paid.
While clean, nonexpanding, nonshrinking sand will normally be
used for instruction purposes in this book, it behooves the dred-
geman to understand that some of the materials he encounters will
expand or shrink when displaced from their in situ location and
pumped to a fill area. When expansion occurs, the production of a
dredge in the fill may appear to be greater than that measured in
the cut. For example, if the material has a 30 percent expansion
factor, the production as measured in the fill and calculated from
the disturbed percent volume of a sample in a graduated cylinder
will coincide. However, if the contract is being paid on the basis
of in situ material removed from the cut, then the production equa-
tion will be affected as follows:
Flow X average percent solids
Prod =
1.3
Or: approximately 23 percent less than actually measured in
the fill.

The converse is true in the case of shrinkage.

VOLUME TO WEIGHT CONVERSION

The following are formulas for determining slurry specific gravity
when either the volume or weight fraction of solids is known:

Where Cv = fraction of solids by volume

SGSO = specific gravity of solids
SGS = specific gravity of slurry
SGW = specific gravity of liquid

For cold water, SGW = 1.0, the formula can be stated as:
22 THEORIES OF DREDGING

When the concentration of solids is given by weight fraction Cw,

i.e., weight of solids/weight of mixture, then:

Solving for SGS we get:

Note that Cv is the fraction of solids expressed in terms of true

volume, i.e., with no voids. To the dredge operator, who is paid for
the volume of the sand on the bank including voids, true volume
is an artificial concept which does not occur in nature. However,
the classical formulas must include true volume for universal ap-
plication, since percent voids varies broadly for different materials.

GRAMS PER LITER CONVERSION

The Waterways Experiment Station at Vicksburg, Mississippi, has
adopted the metric system, grams per liter (g/1), for the expression
of turbidity or suspended solids. The less definitive Jackson Tur-
bidity Unit (Chapter 19) will eventually be replaced by grams per
liter, so that the following relationships (courtesy of the Waterways
Experiment Station) will be useful.11
Relationship between Suspended Solids Concentration,
Bulk Density, and Percent Solids by Weight
Suspended solids concentrations (in grams per liter) can be con-
verted to percent solids by weight or bulk density using the follow-
ing procedure:
Solids concentration (i.e.. weight of dry solids)
(a) = volume of solids
dry density of solids
(b) 1,000 cc of suspension - volume of solids = volume of liquid
(c) Volume of liquid X density of liquid = weight of liquid
Weight of solids X 100 , , „
(d) = percent solids (by weight)
weight of solids + weight of liquid
Weight of solids + weight of liquid
(e) = bulk density of sample (g/cc)
1,000 cc of sample
PRODUCTION RATE CALCULATED 23

Fig. 2-3. Concept of 24-inch offshore dredge with work barge and quarters barge.
Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corporation.

Example: solids concentration = 200 g/1,

density of solids = 2.65 g/cc
density of liquid = 1.03 g/cc

200 g
(a) = 75.47 cc of solids
2.65 g/cc
(b) 1000 cc - 75.47 cc = 924.53 cc of liquid
(c) 924.52 X 1.03 g/cc = 952.27 g of water
Where: density of fresh water = 1.00 g/cc
density of seawater = 1.035 g/cc
200 g x 100
(d) = 17.35 percent solids by weight
200 g + 952.27 g
200 g + 952.27 g
(e) = 1.152 g/cc
1,000 cc
24 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Note that seawater grains per liter is used in the example, and
true volume rather than in situ.
Parts per million (ppm) = mg/1 (milligrams/liter)
Parts per thousand (ppt) = g/1 (grams/liter)

SUMMARY
The dredge is a tool, and production, i.e., the removal of subaque-
ous solids, is its purpose. The simple production equation, regard-
less of units, underlies all discussion of dredge capacity, and is
embellished further in Chapter 3.
 Chapter 3

DREDGE EFFICIENCY

D R E D G E LAW II
AVERAGE PERCENT SOLIDS EQUALS
MAXIMUM PERCENT SOLIDS
TIMES DREDGE EFFICIENCY

As shown in Chapter 2, Dredge Law I indicates that production is

directly proportional to average percent solids. Dredge Law II in-
troduces two new and important terms which require definition.

MAXIMUM PERCENT SOLIDS VS. CAVITATION

The maximum percent solids is defined as the highest practical,
instantaneous percent of solids the hydraulic system can transport,
without cavitating the pump.
Maximum percent solids occurs at a point easily recognizable
by the dredge leverman. On a conventional hydraulic dredge, i.e.,
with a pump in the hull but no submerged pump, the leverman sets
his pump speed to achieve the desired velocity in the pipeline. This
results in perhaps a 7- to 10-inch mercury reading on the vacuum
gauge, representing the head or pressure losses in the suction line
on water alone. Then as the operator lowers his cutter (excavator)
into the bottom material, the vacuum rises abruptly because of the
demand of the heavy solids. At some point, perhaps 24 to 27 inches
mercury, the pump becomes noisy, vibrates, and loses its pumping
effectiveness because of a phenomenon called cavitation. (See
Chapter 11 for a discussion of cavitation.) This occurs when the
natural barometric pressure is no longer capable of overcoming
the losses in the suction line at the rate the pump demands. The
careful operator will control the pickup of solids so as to keep his
26 THEORIES OF DREDGING

vacuum indication an inch or two of mercury below the cavitation

point. This, then, is the maximum percent solids which coincides
with the maximum instantaneous production rate.

DREDGE EFFICIENCY DEFINED

By a simple rearrangement of Dredge Law II we see that:
average percent solids
Dredge efficiency =
maximum percent solids
It is now apparent that dredge efficiency, D.E., is merely the ratio
of the percent solids that the dredge averages over a period of time
to the maximum practical percent solids achievable on an instan-
taneous basis.
Dredge efficiency and maximum percent solids are very impor-
tant to the understanding of the hydraulic principles involved in
dredging. Prior to the SG meter (see Chapter 18) the dredgeman
had no real grasp of the maximum percent solids since he could
only calculate average percent solids after measuring his produc-
tion in the cut or fill by using the Dredge Law I equation. Since
cavitation occurs on maximum percent solids, not average percent
solids, many miscalculations have been made on suction line sizes.
Dredge efficiency is affected by many factors—operator skill,
method of advancing the dredge, height of the submerged bank,
etc. Fig. 3-1 shows the method of advancing for a conventional
walking spud dredge. Also shown is the production diagram during
a single swing and return cycle.
Referring to Fig. 3-1 note that at point A the dredge has swung
the prescribed amount to the port (left) for advancing, after having
completed the previous dredging swing. The operator, at this point,
drops his walking (starboard) spud and raises his working (port)
spud. The dredge now swings to point B, where the cutter has
advanced its full length into the bank. (The advance can vary with
any percentage of the cutter length as a function of the material
being dredged.) The operator now lowers the working spud and
raises the walking spud. The working spud is now a cutter length
ahead of its previous position, and the dredge is on course.
From zero production at A, the dredge advances to 100 percent
production at B, and continues at 100 percent to C. At C, however,
DREDGE EFFICIENCY 27

THE "WALKING" (ADVANCING OPERATION! OF A

DREDGE IS A MAJOR FACTOR AFFECTING DREDGE
EFFICIENCY.

Fig. 3-1. Production while advancing.

the operator reverses the swing and the production is zero until
point D (old point B) where the production starts to rise, reaching
100 percent at point E. It remains at 100 percent to point F, and
then is zero when the swing is reversed to point A' (old E) where
the advancing cycle is repeated.
An examination of the shape of the production diagram in Fig.
3-1 discloses that the dredge efficiency of a walking spud dredge
approximates 50 percent; however, it is entirely possible for such
a dredge to vary between 5 and 75 percent as a function of the
dredging conditions and operator skill. Maintenance dredging,
where the operator must "chase" the material, is generally low
efficiency. River dredging for fill material, with no prescribed chan-
nel to dictate cutter position, can result in quite high efficiency. It
behooves the dredgeman to understand the conditions that affect
dredge efficiency and to estimate accordingly, notwithstanding the
dredge manufacturer's production rating which is probably based
on 50 percent dredge efficiency, and which can be demonstrated
under the proper conditions. The author suggests that 40 percent
D.E. is a better average in today's context, but the correct D.E.
should always be calculated, not assumed, where data is available.
28 THEORIES OF DREDGING

It should now be apparent that dredge production is directly

proportional to D.E. The importance of the estimator's understand-
ing of D.E., and the factors that affect it, are paramount to good
results.
The distinction between D.E. and percent operating time
should be clear. D.E. is a mqjor element in determining the pro-
duction rate during productive operating time. Factors such as op-
erating skill, dredge advance speed, channel width, work face
height, and type of material being dredged enter into the calcula-
tion of D.E.
Downtime is an expression of the hours during the day when
the dredge is not digging and/or pumping material for any reason,
whether scheduled or unscheduled. Routine and normal interrup-
tions to production such as advancing the dredge or resetting the
swing anchors are included in D.E., not downtime.
Operators discovered they could minimize the time it took to
advance a dredge by increasing the spud and swing wire speeds to
accelerate dredge advances. This is a small increase and is seldom
singled out as a separate calculation for D.E.; however, any change
that decreases non-productive time increases D.E. Installation of a
spud carriage to replace the walking spud arrangement signifi-
cantly decreases spudding time; therefore, it will increase D.E. and
productivity by a percentage varying as a function of the job
conditions.
The traditional 50 percent D.E. has encompassed wide varia-
tions in material type, e.g., standing material versus free-flowing
materials, as well as work face heights that allow multiple swing
cycles without the necessity of advancing. These factors, plus
swing width, are significant enough to be considered separately in
the calculation of D.E.
There has been little in the literature regarding the calculation
of D.E. The author had the opportunity to participate in an exper-
iment with an operating cutterhead dredge where the actual swing
cycles were recorded, plotting slurry velocity and SG against time.
The data were analyzed to determine D.E.; these results were then
plotted and smoothed, yielding the curves of Fig. 3-2. (This is new
data, not published previously except in the author's PC software.)
The approximate center of the plot would reasonably support the
use of 40 or 50 percent as a default value, but it should be noted
that D.E. can vary from less than 5 percent to about 75 percent,
DREDGE EFFICIENCY 29

DRDG EFFIC US BANK HEIGHT & M A T J L TYPE

Fig. 3-2.

and that a walking spud dredge on standing material seldom

achieves 50 percent D.E. Since the production rate of a dredge is
directly proportional to D.E., it is obvious that failure to consider
the major influences on D.E. can result in poor estimates. The es-
timator can select a preliminary D.E. from the plotted data of Fig.
3-2, the curves of which allow visual interpolation. D.E. is shown
as a function of (1) work face height, (2) type of material, and (3)
type of advance mechanism. Later a swing width correction is
made if necessary to amend the chart value.
Fig. 3-2 is based on a dredge swing width of 200 feet (61 m);
thus, a swing width other than 200 feet requires correction. Oper-
ators have noted that production rate increased with the width of
the channel dug in a single swing. The wider channel allows more
material to be dredged before the lost time of the dredge advance
occurs; therefore the D.E. increases, increasing production rate.
Some operators have added traveling spud carriages on spud
barges secured to the stern of their dredge. This allows not only
the faster action of the spud carriage advance but a wider potential
swing as well, offering significant improvement in D.E.
The D.E. correction for swing width, either up or down,
changes the ratio of productive time to non-productive time. Cal-
30 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 3-3. "The 27" dredge Illinois with ladder pump, 1,200-horse-power cutter.
Courtesy: Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.

dilation of the change in D.E. can be simple, but an understanding

of the swing cycle is necessary to obtain good results. A recording
of the specific gravity of the slurry, as a dredge goes through its
swing cycle, is a most informative document for an operator. It is
not expensive to obtain during regular operation, and from this the
various portions of the cycle can be identified and timed (spudding,
production, etc.) and the dredge efficiency approximated. It shows
that a wider swing increases production time, while spudding time
remains the same. The recording can even identify the material as
free-flowing or standing, an important consideration in D.E.
determination.
While the D.E. chart has an empirical basis and has been used
with considerable success, the operator may find that Fig. 3-2 and/
or the swing width correction require adjustment for the idiosyn-
crasies of a given dredge. The operator should not hesitate to ad-
just for best results when proven data are available. A personal
computer with appropriate software is highly recommended to de-
termine D.E.

DREDGE LAW I REPHRASED

It should now be apparent that Dredge Law I can be rephrased by
substituting the equality for average percent solids as defined in
Dredge Law II.
DREDGE EFFICIENCY 31

Dredge Law I. Production varies as flow times average

percent solids
Dredge Law II. Average percent solids equals maximum
percent solids times dredge efficiency
Therefore Dredge Law I rephrased is:
Production varies as flow times maximum percent solids
times dredge efficiency

SUMMARY
Production is a direct function of slurry flow rate, maximum per-
cent solids, and D.E. Improvement in any of these elements with-
out penalizing the others will have a salutary effect on production.
There are various ways to improve D.E., and it is advisable for the
operator to be familiar with them all.
 Chapter 4

HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT FACTORS

D R E D G E LAW III
MAXIMUM PERCENT SOLIDS VARIES WITH:
(A) VELOCITY IN THE SUCTION LINE;
(B) THE TYPE OF SOLIDS BEING DREDGED; AND
(C) INVERSELY AS THE SQUARE ROOT
OF THE DIAMETER OF THE SUCTION PIPE

The variances and their effect on dredging will be discussed below.

TURBULENCE REQUIREMENT FOR HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT

Hydraulic engineers have traditionally used the largest line eco-
nomically justifiable to minimize turbulence and flow losses in a
hydraulic system. In hydraulic transport, turbulence is mandatory
to maintain the solids in suspension and to keep them moving at
the approximate velocity of the fluid. If the turbulence is too low,
the solids are not picked up at the suction inlet. If solids are picked
up at a reasonable turbulence and subsequently the turbulence is
reduced, the solids in the system tend to settle to the bottom of
the pipe, creating a serious plugging potential. Maintenance of ade-
quate velocity is a critical concern of the operator since velocity
in the pipeline creates the necessary turbulence. The leverman con-
trols velocity by controlling pump RPM, and velocity varies directly
as pump RPM. The first variable, then, that determines the maxi-
mum percent solids that a dredge line can carry is the velocity in
the suction pipe.
HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT FACTORS 33

SUCTION VELOCITY
Frequently, it is advantageous to have a larger suction line than
discharge line (see Chapter 8 for a further discussion of this topic)
but the velocity at the suction inlet determines the capacity of the
system. Obviously, all fluid and solids that enter the suction line
must pass through the discharge line, and the discharge line if
smaller will have a higher velocity and the solids will not settle
out. If, however, the discharge line is larger than the suction, the
velocity will be lower and the chance of settling out material in
the line will be high. It is not good practice to have the discharge
line larger than the suction, although a discharge line the same
diameter as the suction has advantages when pumping moderate
to long distances.

TURBULENCE REQUIREMENTS OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS

The second variable that determines the maximum percent solids
that a dredge line can carry is the type of solids being conveyed.
The settling velocity of denser, larger material is greater than that
of lighter, smaller material; thus greater turbulence is required to
keep the heavier material in suspension. The shape of the material
can also affect its settling rate. It does not follow indefinitely that
the larger a particle, the higher the required velocity. Very fine ma-
terial has a large surface area per pound and a low settling rate as
compared to larger material of the same density. However, for all
practical purposes, the velocity that will successfully convey heavy
gravel or cobbles will convey boulders. There is a system compen-
sating effect that conveys boulders satisfactorily as long as they
will pass through the pump impeller successfully. As an example,
assume that gravel is being conveyed in a 12-inch pipe at 14 feet
per second. If an 8-inch boulder enters the pipe, the area of the
pipe would be reduced by 44 percent if the boulder were stationary.
This would increase the velocity around the boulder in the line to
25 feet per second, providing more than adequate velocity to trans-
port the boulder. This compensating velocity effect means that for
all practical purposes, it is unnecessary to operate a dredge at ve-
locities higher than those required for gravel unless a rare material
is encountered with a specific gravity greater than 2.65, the normal
rock and sand specific gravity.
34 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Laboratory work has been done to ascertain the elements of a

homogeneous material which affect its transport capabilities. From
this work mathematical formulas have been derived which confirm
that density, size, and shape are significant. However, in nature, a
homogeneous dredge material is so rare as to be of little interest
to the dredge operator. Empirical data on the actual material to be
dredged is his practical answer, and there is data available for a
broad spectrum of material. (See Limiting Velocity Chart, Fig. 4-1.)
Fig. 4-1 shows the velocities in feet per second required in 20-
inch (508 mm) ID pipe to transport the indicated materials at the
specified slurry specific gravities. The velocities required for dif-
ferent size pipes can be calculated easily by the technique shown
in Equation 4-2. The chart in Fig. 4-1 is the only data required for
a computer program to calculate velocities for all dredge sizes.
With a PC, the software makes the necessary size conversions. The
chart is based on granular 2.65 SG (2,650 g/1) solids, with 33.3 per-
cent voids, and a 110 pcf (1,763 g/1) dry density.

VELOCITY REQUIREMENTS OF DIFFERENT PIPE SIZES

The last and most frequently overlooked factor affecting the per-
cent solids a pipeline can carry is the diameter of the pipe. A brief
analysis of the Fanning equation for friction head loss follows:

Therefore: V ~ (d)05

The above is true if we assume that the unit head loss (i.e.,
turbulence) for hydraulic transport of a given material at a given
concentration is constant regardless of line size (a reasonable ap-
proximation). Then, the required velocity will vary as the square
root of the line diameter. This means that a higher velocity is re-
quired in a larger line to transport the same percent solids of a
given material the same distance.
The velocity required in any size line can be calculated if the
satisfactory velocity is known for any other line size. For example,
HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT FACTORS 35

UEL REQ ; D IN 20" (.508 M) PIPE

Fig. 4-1. Velocity limiting curve.

if 10 ft/sec velocity is satisfactory in a 10-inch inside diameter pipe,

the velocity required in a 20-inch pipe would be:

This can be confirmed by checking Fig. 4-1, the limiting velocity

curve for coarse sand. This curve is based upon collected empirical
data for 8-inch inside diameter pipe and extrapolated for other
sizes of pipe. The curves are invaluable to the operator in deter-
mining the necessary velocity for a cost-efficient operation.
It is important to note it is the suction velocity that determines
the percent solids picked up. Obviously, all material that passes the
suction passes the discharge at the same flow rate, GPM, but not
necessarily at the same velocity. Frequently, the suction pipe is
larger than the discharge, so that the same GPM provides different
velocities in the different size lines. Velocity is the key to hydraulic
transport. If a satisfactory velocity can be maintained in a dredge
line at all times, the dredgeman's problems are greatly simplified.
36 THEORIES OF DREDGING

The limiting velocity curves of Fig. 4-1 define fine sand as hav-
ing a median grain size of 0.1 millimeter; medium sand 0.32 milli-
meter; coarse sand 1.0 millimeter; and gravel as 10.0 millimeters.
The dredgeman practically never encounters a material without a
broad spectrum of grain sizes. However, it has been found that a
material with a d50 sieve analysis (i.e., 50 percent above and 50
percent below the designated grain size) which corresponds to ei-
ther fine, medium, or coarse sand or gravel will perform similarly
in a hydraulic transport system. Also, if the d50 falls between the
grain sizes for which limiting velocity curves exist, extrapolation
of velocities gives reasonable results.
The limiting velocity curves are based on a 2.65 specific gravity
material which is true for most materials that the dredgeman en-
counters. With 33.3 percent voids in the sand, the weight of the dry
sand is only:
.667 X 2.65 X 62.4 = 110 Ibs/cu ft or 49.89 kg
With zero voids, the weight would be:
1.00 X 2.65 X 62.4 = 165 Ibs/cu ft or 74.83 kg
but of course, if a dredgeman encounters 165-pound material (solid
rock), he must disintegrate it in some fashion in order to hydrau-
lically transport it. Therefore, the voids are an inevitable part of
his operation.
The specific gravity coordinate of the curves is based upon the
use of 1.0 SG liquid which introduces a negligible error in the event
seawater is the conveying medium. Tests and actual dredge expe-
rience have shown that the dredgeman should always strive to
achieve a 1.5 SG slurry, because here the most cost- and power-
effective hydraulic transport is achieved. This corresponds with
45.4 percent in situ volume. Above this point, the ratio of water to
solids is less conducive to efficient transport, and eventually when
the only water is that which fills the voids in the sand, there is no
water available for hydraulic transport, and the resistance to flow
approaches infinity.

SOIL CLASSIFICATION
The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) is generally used in
the U.S., but it was not developed for the dredging industry and
HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT FACTORS 37

has some shortcomings. It specifies all material passing the 200

mesh screen as silt; yet we know sand exists below 200 mesh.
USCS also specifies coarse sand as passing the #4 sieve (slightly
under one fifth of an inch or 5 mm), which many observers would
consider pea gravel. Recognizing the limitations of the USCS, the
author utilizes a convenient system for dredge calculations that
allows a logical progression from the grain size of one category to
the next by a multiple of 10. PIANC, the respected European or-
ganization involved with ports, navigation, and dredging, has in-
dependently developed a system that has a striking similarity to
the author's system. There are other systems as well that the dred-
geman may encounter.
Fig. 4-2 delineates the size range for each named soil of the
three systems above. While the soil names are the same, the ranges
differ somewhat; however, the PIANC and Turner systems have
midpoints that coincide for Fine, Medium, and Coarse Sands, as
well as Gravel. The USCS system ranges vary from the other two,
but there is some similarity. The advantage of the Turner system
is that the ranges are the same size on the logarithmic scale (but
with Medium Sand superimposed as the midrange of Fine and
Coarse Sand). The ranges are convenient and easy to remember,

Fig. 4-2
38 THEORIES OF DREDGING

with each midpoint coinciding with the beginning of each log sec-
tion, .01, .1, 1, 10, and 100.
It should be emphasized that any of the soil systems can be
used by the dredgeman if proper care is taken. By always referring
to the sieve analysis, the confusion caused by the various systems'
names for differing material ranges is resolved by ignoring the
names and using the median grain size. The d50 is the determining
hydraulic transport factor, not the name.
Nevertheless, names for dredged materials are useful and con-
venient. They have been used traditionally by geotechs and dredge-
men, and would be difficult to eliminate. A program to calculate
dredge capacity should encompass the common materials Silt, Fine
Sand, Medium Sand, Coarse Sand, and Gravel; but it is important
that the d50 and/or size range for each material be clearly defined.
It is essential that the dredgeman know which soil system is
utilized in the project specifications to avoid name confusion. He
also needs to understand the rudiments of geotechnology where it
affects the performance of his cutter or slurry system. See Chapter
13, "Cutters".
Although the dredgeman does not need all the expertise of the
geotech, there are aspects where his perspective must override that
of the geotech. For example, when deriving a d50 from the sieve
analysis of a material for production calculations, the dredgeman
must consider the material's condition as it reaches the hydraulic
transport system. The geotechnical engineer may disintegrate a
hard-pan sample in the lab for sieve analysis and obtain a d50 of
.316 mm, the midpoint for Medium Sand; however, if the material
fails to disintegrate completely under the action of the cutter (a
likely scenario with cemented sands), the dredgeman should use
higher velocities and friction losses than those required for Me-
dium Sand. It is a good rule of thumb to use the rheological char-
acteristics of coarse sand for calculating cemented Fine and Me-
dium Sands and Clays that do not disintegrate thoroughly under
the action of the cutter.
There is a story told about the self-taught dredgeman who had
great success with his 10-inch dredge on coarse sand, while pump-
ing at a 10 foot per second velocity. He calculated that if he had a
20-inch dredge, he could run it with the same personnel, and since
it would have 4 times the flow of the 10-inch dredge at the same
velocity (area varies as diameter squared), he expected 4 times the
HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT FACTORS 39

Fig. 4-3. Dredge Wheeler, the Great Flagship of the U.S. Army Corps' of Engineers,
with three dragarms (two overside and one in centerwell). Hopper capacity 8,000
cu yd. Courtesy: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

production and much improved profits. So he invested all of his

accumulated savings in a new 20-inch dredge.
By referring to the coarse sand limiting velocity curve, it is
apparent that while 10 feet per second provided about 45 percent
solids (in situ slurry volume) in his 10-inch dredge, his 20-inch
dredge, at 10 feet per second provided an in situ slurry volume of
only 8 percent solids. His production (according to Dredge Law I)
dropped as follows:
Production ~ [4 X (flow)] x [8/45 percent solids] = .711
Or only 71.1 percent of the production of the 10-inch dredge.
Therefore, our dredgeman was financially and professionally
embarrassed when his new, larger dredge produced at a lower rate
than his old, smaller unit. He had failed to recognize that as pipe-
lines increase in size, they require higher velocities to achieve the
turbulence required to carry the same percent solids.
40 THEORIES OF DREDGING

SUMMARY
The percent solids that can be carried in a pipeline is a function
of the slurry velocity, the nature of the solids, and the size of the
pipeline. Turbulence is required to keep the solids in suspension
and flowing. Larger lines require a higher velocity to achieve the
equivalent turbulence of a smaller line at a lower velocity. The
dredgeman does not require all the soils expertise of the geotech,
but he must be able to interpret the geotech data. Recognizing the
various soils and their effect on the performance of his dredge is
essential.
 Chapter 5

MAXIMUM DREDGE PRODUCTION

D R E D G E LAW IV
THE MAXIMUM OUTPUT OF A DREDGE VARIES
AS THE AREA OF THE SUCTION PIPE

The maximum output of a dredge occurs on short discharge lines

where there are no pump head or velocity limitations. We shall see
that the limitation is barometric.

BAROMETRIC HEAD INDUCES FLOW

Fig. 5-1 represents a tank filled with water to a level of h feet.
Water exits through the nozzle at velocity V, which is a function of
the water head available to create V. This relationship is expressed
by the velocity head term developed in Chapter 1 as follows:

By eliminating the constants, we can say:

By rearranging and taking the square root of both terms, we see that:

There is obviously barometric pressure equal to 34 feet of water

on the surface of the water in the tank. This does not add to the
head available to generate velocity through the nozzle because the
same barometric pressure is external to the tank resisting the flow
of water through the nozzle. However, if we could discharge the
nozzle into an infinitely large tank and evacuate the tank to an
42 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 5-1. Velocity through nozzle.

absolute head of 6 feet of water, i.e., a vacuum of 28 feet, then we

would add 28 feet of water to the head h, increasing V as follows:

Now, if we assume the water level in the supply tank drops to the
nozzle level, the h becomes zero and:
V ~ V28
By substituting a dredge pump for the impossible concept of an
infinitely large tank, we now have a practical analog of the hy-
draulic system of a dredge. See Fig. 5-2. Most dredge pumps are
mounted with their centerline at or near the waterline, and a good
pump can pull a maximum vacuum of about 25 inches of mercury
or 28 feet of water without fear of cavitation. Since there is no
static water head on the suction side of the pump, the only force
available to induce flow to the pump is barometric pressure, or
the 28 feet of it that the pump can utilize.

DREDGE FLOW VARIES WITH SUCTION LINE VELOCITY

AND ARE A
The dredge pump is a device that evacuates its casing; it cannot
mechanically reach down the suction pipe to pick up the slurry.
But since nature abhors a vacuum, its ubiquitous barometric pres-
sure rushes in to fill the vacuum. To reach the evacuated pump
casing, however, barometric pressure must pass through the suc-
tion pipe and through the excavated soil placed at the suction
mouth, thus creating the velocities needed for hydraulic transport.
MAXIMUM DREDGE PRODUCTION 43

Fig. 5-2. Dredge suction system.

The dredge pump then picks up the slurry provided by this baro-
metric pump, and generates its own pressure from the impeller
velocity as explained in Chapter 1. The slurry then passes through
the discharge line to the disposal area; thus, the dredge performs
its hydraulic function.
The suction line is the only access to the suction side of the pump;
and the only force to induce velocity through the cross-sectional
area (As) of the suction pipe is barometric pressure. Therefore:

Since we know that the maximum suction velocity, Vs, is a func-

tion of the square root of 28 at sea level, then Vs is a constant. It
follows then that:
Flow maximum ~ AS
Since production ~ flow X average percent solids
[Dredge Law I]
Then maximum production ~ [Dredge Law IV]
In reality, the dredge pump is a booster pump to nature's bar-
ometric pump (the weight of the atmosphere that forces water to
44 THEORIES OF DREDGING

the pump), and as every experienced dredgeman knows, when the

dredge pump is run faster than the barometric pump can supply it,
cavitation results. It has been the author's experience that the most
significant dredge design errors have been in the sizing of the suc-
tion pipe with respect to the other elements of the dredge. Also,
the discharge pipe is frequently mis-sized. As a rule, when a line-
sizing error exists, the suction line is too large, and the discharge
line is too small. This will be discussed further in Chapter 8.

EFFECT OF ALTITUDE ON VELOCITY

The examples and calculations in this book are based upon the
approximate barometric pressure at sea level of 30 inches mercury,
34 feet water, or 14.7 psig. Since this pressure is induced by the
head of the air column above the earth's surface, measured at sea
level, it follows that if we measure the barometric pressure at in-
creasing elevations, the head diminishes. This is analogous to the
pressure reduction on an object which is rising from the depths of
a body of water. Since both water and air are fluids, the effect of
lessening the fluid column on head is identical.
The table showing the effect of altitude on the density and
barometric pressure of air is shown in Fig. 5-3. Note that at sea
level (zero altitude) the barometric pressure is 29.92 inches mer-
cury; at 1,000 feet altitude 28.85 inches; at 3,000 feet, 26.81 inches;
while at Denver, Colorado (using 5,200 feet altitude for the mile
high city), the barometric pressure is only 24.71 inches mercury or
82.6 percent of the pressure at sea level.
Does this reduction in force affect the capacity of a dredge
operating in Denver? Very much so. The only force available to
push the slurry to the evacuated dredge pump is barometric pres-
sure, and that force is reduced to .826 X 34 = 28 feet of water.
Since the imperfect dredge pump is unable to utilize the last
6 feet of the barometric pressure, 6 feet must be deducted from
the 28 feet available, leaving only 22 feet to overcome the Denver
suction losses. Since suction velocity Vs varies as the square root
of available barometric head,
MAXIMUM DREDGE PRODUCTION 45

ALTITUDE: DENSITY TABLE FOR AIR

Standard Air at 0 Altitude and 29.92" Bar = 1.00
Altitudes in Feet Constant Temperature = 70° F

Rel Rel Rel

Alt Den Bar Alt Den Bar Alt Den Bar
0 1.00 29.92 2000 0.930 27.82 5000 0.832 24.89
100 0.996 29.81 2100 0.926 27.72 5200 0.825 24.71
200 0.993 29.70 2200 0.923 27.62 5400 0.819 24.52
300 0.989 29.60 2300 0.920 27.52 5600 0.813 24.34
400 0.985 29.49 2400 0.916 27.41 5800 0.807 24.16
500 0.981 29.38 2500 0.913 27.31 6000 0.799 23.98
600 0.978 29.28 2600 0.909 27.21 6500 0.786 23.53
700 0.975 29.17 2700 0.906 27.11 7000 0.774 23.09
800 0.971 29.06 2800 0.903 27.01 7500 0.758 22.65
900 0.967 28.96 2900 0.900 26.91 8000 0.739 22.12
1000 0.964 28.85 3000 0.896 26.81 8600 0.728 21.80
1100 0.960 28.75 3200 0.889 26.61 9000 0.715 21.38
1200 0.957 28.65 3400 0.883 26.42 9500 0.701 20.98
1300 0.954 28.54 3600 0.877 26.23 10000 0.687 20.57
1400 0.951 28.44 3800 8.870 26.03 15000 0.564 16.88
1500 0.947 28.33 4000 0.864 25.84 20000 0.458 13.70
1600 0.944 28.23 4200 0.858 25.65 25000 0.371 11.10
1700 0.940 28.13 4400 0.851 25.46 30000 0.297 8.88
1800 0.936 28.02 4600 0.845 25.27 35000 0.235 7.03
1900 0.933 27.92 4800 0.839 25.08 40000 0.185 5.54

Fig. 5-3. Altitude effect on air density and barometric pressure.

This is a reduction of 11.4 percent in maximum velocity, but is only

the tip of the iceberg with respect to dredge capacity. The discus-
sion in Chapter 6 will disclose the need to redistribute the available
suction head over the various losses in the suction line so as to
optimize production. Depending upon digging depth, material being
pumped, size of dredge, etc., production could be lowered much
more than 11.4 percent as a result of the loss in barometric head
pressure caused by the Denver altitude.

EFFECT OF ALTITUDE AND TEMPERATURE ON HORSEPOWER

There is yet another potential loss in dredge capability because of
altitude. Note that the density of air in Denver is only 0.832 of that
at sea level. Diesel engines require a great deal of air to supply the
oxygen necessary to efficiently burn the oil iryected into the cyl-
inders. If the air is rarefied, i.e., reduced in density, the engine HP
must be down-rated.
A further down-rating of the engine HP may occur if the tem-
perature of the intake air is too high. Note Fig. 5-4 in which a loss
of air density is shown as the temperature increases. Air for inter-
46 THEORIES OF DREDGING

TEMPERATURE: DENSITY TABLE FOR AIR*

Temp in deg Fahr Standard Air = 70° F = 1.00

Temp Dens Temp Dens Temp Dens Temp Dens Temp Dens
-10 1.178 60 1.019 100 .946 200 .803 400 .616
-5 1.165 62 1.015 105 .938 210 .791 425 .599
0 1.152 64 1.011 110 .930 220 .779 450 .582
5 1.140 66 1.008 115 .922 230 .768 475 .567
10 1.128 68 1.004 120 .914 240 .757 500 .552

15 1.116 70 1.000 125 .906 250 .747 525 .538

20 1.104 72 .996 130 .898 260 .736 550 .528
25 1.093 74 .992 135 .891 270 .726 575 .512
30 1.082 76 .989 140 .883 280 .716 600 .500
35 1.071 78 .985 145 .876 290 .707 625 .488

40 1.060 80 .982 150 .869 300 .697 650 .477

42 1.056 82 .978 155 .862 310 .688 675 .467
44 1.052 84 .974 160 .855 320 .680 700 .457
46 1.047 86 .971 165 .848 330 .671 725 .447
48 1.043 88 .967 170 .841 340 .662 750 .438

50 1.039 90 .964 175 .835 350 .654 775 .429

52 1.035 92 .960 180 .828 360 .646 800 .421
54 1.031 94 .957 185 .822 370 .638 825 .412
56 1.027 96 .953 190 .815 380 .631 850 .404
58 1.023 98 .950 195 .809 390 .624 875 .397

*Density in this sense is relative density or more properly specific gravity.

Fig. 5-4. Temperature effect on air density.

Fig. 5-5. Split hull trailing suction hopper dredge Eagle 1. Courtesy: C. F. Bean
Corporation.
MAXIMUM DREDGE PRODUCTION 47

nal combustion engines should normally be taken from outside the

engine room, since it is possible to encounter engine room tem-
peratures as high as 130°F, which result in air density losses ex-
ceeding 10 percent.

SUMMARY
The only force available to a conventional dredge to push slurry
to the dredge pump is barometric pressure. When barometric pres-
sure is utilized fully, the maximum velocity occurs in the suction
line and maximum capacity is achieved as a function of the area
of the suction pipe. Altitude above sea level reduces barometric
pressure and air density for fuel combustion, and therefore can
cause an appreciable reduction in dredge productivity.
Artist's version of the Suez Canal's dredge, Mashour, 30,785 HP, the world's
most powerful cutterhead dredge, scheduled for delivery in 1996. Courtesy:
IHC.
 Chapter 6

THE SUCTION LINE AND

DIGGING DEPTH

D R E D G E LAW V
THE OPTIMUM SUCTION LINE VELOCITY VARIES
WITH THE DIGGING DEPTH

Years ago, the author visited a large dredge which was working on
the harbor of Marseilles, France. The cutter was set at a digging
depth of 7 meters. Upon completing a cut, the operator of the
dredge lowered the cutter to 10 meters and immediately adjusted
his pump speed upward. When asked why he had increased pump
speed, he responded, "Everyone knows it takes more horsepower
to pick material up from 10 meters than it does from 7 meters. I
just gave it more horsepower."
And indeed he had, for he increased substantially the water he
was pumping. But, he had also reduced his solids payload signifi-
cantly and was getting nothing in return for his increased fuel con-
sumption except decreased production, increased wear, and addi-
tional water problems in the disposal area. This chapter explains
why the operator's action was incorrect, and what he should have
done.

ANALYSIS OF SUCTION LINE LOSSES

A fundamental grasp of the functions and problems of the suction
line is the key to understanding the hydraulic dredge. Most prob-
lems with the pumping system originate in the suction line; its
equilibrium is delicately balanced, easily disturbed, and sorely re-
stricted by the barometric limitation. This chapter examines the
50 THEORIES OF DREDGING

losses in the suction line, the understanding of which is essential

to the proper design and operation of a hydraulic dredge.
In a hydraulic dredge without a ladder pump, the only force to
overcome the suction line losses is the barometric pressure af-
forded by the column of air above the earth's surface. This is the
equivalent of 34 feet (10.35 meters) of water head on the surface
of the water being dredged. A conventional dredge pump can util-
ize 28 feet (8.54 meters) of that amount to feed the pump during
normal operation.
This is referred to as "vacuum" in the suction line, i.e., 28 feet
less than barometric pressure, or more accurately as 6 feet of ab-
solute pressure. If the operator exceeds the 28-foot vacuum, he
runs the risk of cavitation (see Chapter 11). The task of the oper-
ator under most conditions is to utilize the full 28 feet to maximize
productivity, but to avoid cavitation. To complicate his problem
further, the operator must distribute the 28 feet over the various
losses in the most effective manner to optimize production.
There are four ever-present losses in the suction line of an op-
erating dredge, and a fifth if the dredge pump is above the water
line: (1) velocity head—the head necessary to accelerate the slurry
from standstill to the required transport velocity; (2) entrance
loss—the head required to force the slurry into the suction mouth;
(3) friction loss—the head to overcome frictional resistance to
flow in the pipe; (4) specific gravity head—the head to lift the
solids in the slurry from the bottom of the channel to the centerline
of the pump; and (5) lift head—the head to lift the slurry from the
waterline to the pump centerline (a loss when the pump is above
the waterline, and a gain when below).

VELOCITY HEAD
The velocity head term is common to all hydraulic calculations,
appearing in most equations. Its formula is Hv = (yV2g) X SG. Since
water has an SG of 1.0, the SG term can be ignored when dealing
with water alone; however, when dealing with slurries, it is essen-
tial. Logically, more force is required to accelerate a slurry of 1.5
SG to a given velocity than for 1.0 SG water—50 percent more as
demonstrated by the equation above.
THE SUCTION LINE AND DIGGING DEPTH 51

By ignoring the constants of 2g and SG in the Hv equation, it

can be seen that Hv varies with the square of velocity. Conversely,
in this completely reversible relationship, the velocity varies with
the square root of the available head; therefore, in order to double
the velocity, it is necessary to quadruple the head. Obviously, this
is not a straight line relationship, but it is not all bad; if we double
the tip speed of a pump impeller, we get four times the head, a
most fortuitous circumstance for the users of centrifugal pumps.
With respect to the suction line, it is important to recognize
that as velocity is increased, more of the barometric pressure must
be utilized to provide the necessary velocity head. Fortunately, the
required head only increases as the square root of the velocity;
however, since only 28 feet of barometric pressure is available, any
increase in velocity head demands a corresponding decrease else-
where. The operator must utilize the valuable 28 feet in the most
efficient manner, because excessive velocity can reduce percent
solids and productivity.

ENTRANCE LOSS
Entrance loss has traditionally gotten little industry attention in
proportion to its importance. There is much more consciousness
of friction in the suction line, but seldom does friction rise to the
level of entrance loss. Entrance loss deserves to be better
understood.
The formula for entrance loss is He = K X (W2g) x SG. This
equation is identical to Hv except for the entrance coefficient, K.
Cameron Hydraulic Data shows K varying between .04 and .5, but
this is for Newtonian fluids and can mislead the unwary dredge-
man. The slurry attempting to crowd its way into the suction mouth
is a far cry from a Newtonian fluid, and requires a much higher
coefficient. In the event of a cave-in, when the suction mouth can
be covered by many feet or meters of material, the coefficient can
approach infinity, causing instant cavitation. For a suction line to
pick up the desired slurry of 1.5 SG, the suction mouth must be
essentially covered by a shallow depth of granular solids, thus as-
suring the high solids content required for economic operation. If
a portion of the mouth is not covered, the water takes the path of
least resistance, entering the pipe without its solids load. The sol-
52 THEORIES OF DREDGING

ids-covered suction mouth requires a higher entrance coefficient.

An entrance coefficient of 1.0 has successfully emulated the dredg-
ing operation. Conceivably, it may be high for light-maintenance
material and low for clays, but it has worked well in general ap-
plications. This makes the entrance loss equivalent to that of the
velocity head for slurry, as it, too, must be multiplied by the SG of
the slurry.

FRICTION LOSS
The Darcy-Weisbach equation for friction loss is Hf = F X (L/D) X
(V*V2g) X SG, where F is the friction factor, L is the line length,
and D is the inside diameter of the pipe in feet. This equation is
not as convenient as the Hazen-Williams equation on slurries (see
Chapter 10), but is helpful in showing the relationship of the Hv
term to suction line analysis. By calculating the friction loss for
water with Darcy-Weisbach and multiplying by SG, a reasonable
figure is achieved.

SPECIFIC GRAVITY HE AD
The equation for specific gravity head is HSG = DD X [SGs - SGW].
Note the equation calculates solids lift only, since the water SG is
deducted from the slurry SG. Water seeks its own level. With the
pump centerline at water level, no lift is required for water; how-
ever, the solids require a lift from the bottom to the pump center-
line (the digging depth).
It should be emphasized that the suction line losses are cal-
culated with the maximum SG, not the average. The dredge pump
does not cavitate at the average SG, but when the maximum SG
demands the highest vacuum. Average SG is used successfully in
calculating the losses in the long discharge line, because the long
line contains peaks and valleys of SG, resulting in automatic av-
eraging; however, the short suction line requires the use of maxi-
mum SG.

SUCTION LIFT
Most dredge pumps are mounted at the waterline, and a suction
lift is not required. When the dredge pump is above or below the
THE SUCTION LINE AND DIGGING DEPTH 53

waterline, a lift (positive or negative) is required as shown by the

equation HL = L X SGS. Note that unlike HSG, where solids only had
to be raised to the pump, here both water and solids must be lifted.
It is a serious error to build a dredge with its pump above the
waterline, unless it has a ladder pump to provide the lift. To deplete
the limited barometric head for a suction lift reduces the dredge
capacity significantly and unnecessarily. A 3-foot lift would require
4.5 feet of barometric head at 1.5 SG. This would reduce the avail-
able head by 4.5/28 X 100 = 16 percent. This would reduce velocity
and capacity by almost 30 percent.
An increase in capacity can be achieved by mounting the pump
below the waterline within the dredge hull. This increase is modest
because of the physical limitation on lowering the pump in the
shallow conventional hull. Most designers conclude that the in-
crease is not worth the hazard and/or the inconvenience of being
unable to remove the stone box cover for fear of sinking the
dredge. Unfortunately, this has occurred.

OPTIMIZING SUCTION VELOCITY

Since the dredge pump makes only 28 feet of barometric head
available, it must be distributed among the various suction losses.
For each calculation, the sum of the losses is equated to 28 feet,
and then the maximum (optimum) velocity is calculated. Obvi-
ously, as depth is increased, velocity is decreased. There is an op-
timum suction velocity for every depth, the determination of which
is the first step in calculating dredge rate. Fig. 6-1 is an approxi-

Water Slurry
30-ft depth 30-ft depth 50-ft depth 50-ft depth
Parameter 1.0 Sg 1.5 SG 1.36 SG 1.24 SG
Hv 3.3 5 4 6
He 1.7 5 4 6
Hf 2.0 3 2 4
HSG 0 15 18 12
HL 0 0 0 0
Total 7.0 28 28 28

FIG. 6-1. TVpical suction losses for 24 inch dredge.

54 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 6-2. Dredging International's hopper dredge Pearl River, with 17,000 m3 hop-
per capacity, the largest trailer afloat in 1995. Courtesy: IHC.

mation of the suction losses for the conditions shown. Note that
at the 30-foot depth, the dredge achieves the desirable 1.5 SG, util-
izing the entire 28 feet of barometric pressure. At the 50-foot depth,
velocity has been sacrificed for HSG, but even then, an SG of only
1.36 is achieved. This means that when the depth is increased from
30 to 50 feet, the velocity and SG are both reduced so that the
capacity of the dredge is decreased exponentially. If the operator
makes the mistake of increasing the suction velocity at the expense
of HSG when depth is increased (Fig. 6-1, last column), the capacity
is further reduced. More water is pumped, but the solids, the
dredge's payload, are reduced.
The 7-foot total under the first column in Fig. 6-1 (water) rep-
resents the "water vacuum" for the 30-foot depth before solids en-
ter the suction line. The 28 feet under the other columns represents
maximum practicable vacuum before cavitation.
THE SUCTION LINE AND DIGGING DEPTH 55

SUMMARY
The natural tendency of the operator to increase suction velocity
as digging depth increases results in increased costs and lower
production. There is an optimum or correct velocity for every
depth. This optimum velocity results in the distribution of the 28
feet of barometric pressure over the several suction losses so as
to maximize production rate. An understanding of the suction line
and its losses is essential to the efficient operation of the hydraulic
dredge. A computer program that calculates the optimum suction
velocity is a valuable aid to the operator. Once this velocity is es-
tablished, other data helpful to the leverman fall into place, e.g.,
head, specific gravity of slurry, friction loss per 100 feet of line,
cubic yard per hour, maximum line length, and HP. Knowing a
dredge's capability can prove highly motivational to its operators.
 Chapter 7

HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH

D R E D G E LAW VI
LINE LENGTH VARIES
AS PUMP HORSEPOWER

During an extended trip through South America, the author was

invited aboard a large, well-maintained dredge working in a major
harbor. Obviously, the operators took great pride in the impressive
dredge, which they had purchased in the United States. It was
equipped with conventional dredge instruments, vacuum gauge,
pressure gauge, RPM indicator, but they did not have a productio
meter. A powerful diesel engine drove the dredge pump, and it was
tended lovingly by the watch engineer.
During operation, it became apparent that the leverman did not
control the pump speed. Investigation disclosed that the watch en-
gineer established the pump engine speed (regardless of operating
conditions) by observing the exhaust manifold temperature and
acljusting engine speed to maintain the maximum allowable mani-
fold temperature, in order to provide maximum horsepower out-
put. These conscientious operators reasoned that if they were max-
imizing the pump horsepower, they were maximizing production.
Since maximum centrifugal pump horsepower coincides with max-
imum velocity which is frequently inimical to high production, we
know from Dredge Laws IV and V that this reasoning is fallacious.
Not only were the operators needlessly burning fuel and wearing
out components with excessive velocity, but they were reducing
production by severely limiting the solids percentage of the slurry.
Dredge pump horsepower is a significant element and influ-
ences productivity under various circumstances. However, there is
HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH 57

no consistent correlation between maximum horsepower and max-

imum production. In order to examine the significance of pump
horsepower to dredge production, we should start with the pump
horsepower equation which follows:

GPM, American gallons per minute, times 8.34 represents

pounds per minute of water. When multiplied by the specific grav-
ity of the slurry, pounds per minute of sluny is obtained. When
further multiplied by head, we obtain foot pounds per minute, a
true horsepower expression. Since there are 33,000 foot pounds
per minute in one horsepower, dividing by that value determines
the horsepower demand of the fluid. The pump is not 100 percent
efficient, so the equation must also incorporate the pump efficiency
in the denominator to obtain the drive horsepower required at the
input end of the pump shaft.

HORSEPOWER VS. GPM, SG, AND h

By eliminating the numerical constants in the horsepower equa-
tion, and ignoring pump efficiency which changes with gallons per
minute, we have a very convenient and useful form of the horse-
power equation.

This says that horsepower varies directly with gallons per minute,
specific gravity, and head required. Any change that the operator
makes in any of these elements has a direct and predictable effect
on horsepower.
By going a step further and eliminating all elements in Equation
7-1 that we know should remain constant, we can relate HP to any
remaining variables. The reader will recall Dredge Law V which
states the velocity in the suction line should be a constant at a
given digging depth. Obviously, we know the depth at which the
dredge is digging so that the velocity (and therefore the GPM term
in the equation) is constant. The specific gravity will be held at a
58 THEORIES OF DREDGING

constant maximum for production reasons, and will result in a con-

stant average in the discharge line as a function of dredge effi-
ciency. Pump efficiency is a constant at a constant GPM as shown
on the pump characteristic curve.
This leaves the only variable as the head, h, and head is directly
proportional to line length. For example, if the head loss is five
feet per 100 feet of line, and there are 4,000 feet of line, including
suction, the loss is:

This loss is within the capability of a single dredge pump, most of

which would have a head-generating capability of between 200 and
260 feet. If the line length were only 3,000 feet, the head require-
ment would be 150 feet, and the pump could be slowed down and
the horsepower correspondingly reduced. On the other hand, if the
job requirement were 8,000 feet, the head requirement would be
400 feet. This would require a booster pump with the same horse-
power as the dredge pump.
It should be apparent that with gallons per minute and specific
gravity constant, the horsepower will vary directly as head, which
varies directly with line length. Therefore, the line length against
which a dredge can pump is a function of the horsepower available
on the pumping system, Dredge Law VI.
The explanation above assumes that there is a reasonable com-
patibility between the pump and its drive, i.e., that the drive has
the horsepower required to turn the impeller at the gear ratio pro-
vided, and that the impeller can absorb the horsepower and trans-
mit it to the fluid. For further discussion of pumps and drivers, see
Chapter 13. For a graphical picture of the effect of the pump horse-
power, see the production charts in Chapter 8.

PIPELINE SIZE VS. FRICTION

The flow through a pipeline is the product of the velocity times the
area of the pipe.

Where Q = cu ft/sec, V = ft/sec and A = sq ft

HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH 59
To convert to the more common GPM:

To convert A to the more commonly used inside diameter of the

pipe in inches:

Where A = Cross sectional area of pipe in square feet

V = Velocity in ft/sec
d = Inside diameter of pipe in inches
GPM = Gallons per minute

hF VS. GPM AND PIPE DIAMETER

The Fanning or Darcy-Weisbach equation for Friction Head is:

By eliminating constants, we can express the convenient rela-

tionship between friction head, velocity, and inside pipe diameter.

By substituting the value of V in Equation 7-6 and dropping the

constant, we obtain:

From this relationship we can see that if GPM is held constant and
the pipe diameter is doubled, the unit friction head become 1/32
of its former value. (Actually, the empirical Hazen-Williams equa-
tion indicates friction varies inversely with pipe diameter to the
60 THEORIES OF DREDGING

4.8655 power rather than 5.0.)

Of course, the converse is true. If the pipe diameter is halved, the

friction increases.

Seldom does the occasion arise where the dredgeman makes a

practical decision to halve or double his line size. However, he is
constantly making decisions between, e.g., 12-inch and 14-inch
lines, and this is a common ratio of discharge to suction line on
dredges shown as follows:

This indicates that the unit friction head of a 12-inch inside diam-
eter pipeline is more than twice that of a 14-inch inside diameter
pipeline for a given GPM. This can be confirmed by checking
against any friction table which uses the Fanning equation, e.g., the
Cameron Hydraulic Data. The same calculation for 20- and 24-inch
pipe indicates a 2.49 greater loss for the smaller pipe.

EFFECT OF SUCTION SIZE ON PUMPING DISTANCE

As the sixth Dredge Law states, the dredge discharge line length
capability is a function of the HP of the pumping system; there is,
however, another factor that affects line length: suction line size.
Perhaps the most common error in dredge design occurs in
sizing the suction line with respect to the discharge line. If the
suction line is too large, low velocity causes low solids pick-up and
low production. On the other hand, if the discharge line is too
small, a high price is paid in friction, wear, and fuel.
See Fig. 7-1 for a computer-generated graph representing pro-
duction for a 20-inch dredge, with three different suction sizes. The
dredge is identical in all respects other than suction size. A case
can be made in favor of either suction line size as a function of
digging depth and line length. The following table of examples is
derived from Fig. 7-1.
HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH 61

Fig. 7-1. 20-inch dredge with various suctions.

Suction Digging Line Production

Diameter Depth Length Rate
24 30 2,500 1,200*
22 30 2,500 1,010
20 30 2,500 825
24 30 5,000 510
22 30 5,000 980*
20 30 5,000 825
24 30 9,000 220
22 30 9,000 380
20 30 9,000 825*

At a 30-foot depth, the 24-inch suction has a clear production ad-

vantage (*) at the 2,500-foot line length; the 22-inch is superior at
5,000; and the 20-inch at 9,000 feet. Under the specified conditions,
the 20-inch suction never causes a discharge line length limitation,
but it is barometrically limited to a maximum rate of 825 cu yd/hr.
The 24-inch suction becomes velocity limited at 2,500 feet, the 22-
inch at 5,000 feet, and the 20-inch at 9000.
It is apparent that the optimum suction line size is a function
of project conditions. If different depths or line lengths are used
than those above, the production advantage will shift. Thus, there
is an optimum ratio of suction to discharge line size as a function
of the project conditions.
62 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Without the computer to develop production charts such as Fig.

7-1, the dredge operator functions at a disadvantage. See Chapter
8 for a further discussion of production charts.
The most efficient hydraulic transport occurs near the mini-
mum limiting velocity required by the material being pumped. See
Fig. 4-1. It is specious reasoning to "play it safe" by using a smaller
discharge line to avoid "settling out" and the possibility of "plug-
ging" the line. This possibility is actually increased by the smaller
line when pumping long distances because the head of the pump
is limited, and the unit friction head is increased by 2.16 times
when using a 12-inch line versus 14-inch, or 2.49 times when using
a 20-inch versus a 24-inch line. By using Equation 7-8, the friction
loss can be ascertained for any line sizes.

HORSEPOWER VS. LINE SIZE (HORSEPOWER COEFFICIENT)

The amount of horsepower made available to the dredge pump has
varied significantly from builder to builder throughout the years.
One builder, e.g., recommended the use of a 3,600-horsepower die-
sel engine for its standard 30-inch dredge pump. Others have felt
that a 5,000-horsepower drive was better. Some dredge pump build-
ers have gone as high as 6,000 and 7,000 horsepower. The horse-
power variation has not been restricted to 30-inch units, but wide
variations have been apparent through the entire range of dredge
design from 10 inches up through 36 inches.
Dredge Laws III and VI provide insight as to the requirement
of horsepower when a dredge line size is established. Dredge Law
III states that to carry the optimum percent solids of a given ma-
terial in a given size line, the velocity in the line must be such as
to provide a relatively high level of turbulence. Then, if the line
size is increased, flow will necessarily increase as the square of the
ratio of the line sizes at the same velocity; however, the velocity
must increase as the square root of the ratio of the new line to the
old to maintain transport turbulence. As a result, horsepower must
increase still further.
Dredge Law VI states that the distance a dredge can pump its
production is directly proportional to the horsepower on the
dredge pump. It also develops from the pump horsepower equation
HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH 63

that:

For the purpose of developing a horsepower constant to guide

in powering any size pump, we shall assume the following regard-
ing the above relationship:
1. The specific gravity of slurry will be the same regardless of line
size. The operator should attempt to optimize his solids content at
all times.
2. The product line length requirements will not vary regardless of
whether a small or a large dredge is used. The material must be
moved from its in situ location to the disposal area.
3. The optimum friction loss per 100 feet of line for a given concen-
tration of a given material is relatively constant, regardless of line
size. This was previously established in connection with Dredge
Law m.
Acceptance of the above assumptions leaves horsepower var-
ying solely as GPM (Equation 7-2). Since GPM for a given velocity
varies as the area of the pipe and as the square of the diameter, it
is apparent that horsepower will also vary as the square of the pipe
diameter against which it is pumping. However, Dredge Law III
points out that as a pipeline increases in diameter, the turbulence
in the pipe at a given velocity decreases. Therefore, in order to
retain the turbulence required to convey the same percent solids,
the velocity must increase to the .5 power as the pipe size in-
creases. Thus, horsepower varies as:

This states that the horsepower required to pump a given concen-

tration a constant distance varies as line diameter to the exponen-
tial of 2.5. Therefore, we can establish a convenient horsepower
coefficient, CHP, by dividing the horsepower available to the dredge
pump by the discharge line diameter to the 2.5 exponential.
64 THEORIES OF DREDGING

An 18-inch dredge pump which has 1,125 horsepower would

have a horsepower coefficient of:

Likewise, a 24-inch dredge pump with 2,250 horsepower would

have:

Fig. 7-2 shows twelve other examples of cutterhead dredge

pumps and drives. All of the units (plus the two above) have been
successful except for numbers 3 and 7. Both of these units had
excessive wear and cavitation problems due, at least partially, to
the fact that their discharge lines were too small for effective util-
ization of the horsepower available. Their horsepower coefficients
confirm this.
No. Size HP CHP
1 30 3,600 .73
2 30 5,000 1.01
3 27 5,200 1.37
4 27 2,875 .76
5 24 2,875 1.02
6 22 2,250 .99
7 20 2,250 1.26
8 20 1,700 .95
9 16 970 .95
10 16 850 .83
11 14 725 .99
12 12 480 .96
Fig. 7-2. Pump horsepower coefficients for existing cutterhead dredges.

None of the above pumps was unsatisfactory because of low

horsepower coefficient. Problems of cost, size, and wear arise with
high horsepower coefficient, but low horsepower coefficient re-
sults only in limited pumping distance. Therefore, if a project has
a short line length, a low horsepower coefficient could prove sat-
isfactory. For example, a 24-inch hopper dredge with 1,000-horse-
power pump is a viable design, and has a horsepower coefficient
of only 0.35. The lowest horsepower coefficient for a cutterhead
dredge known to the author was 0.51 where the special design
dredge was used for creating canals in a delta and was pumping
HORSEPOWER VS. LINE LENGTH 65

approximately 1,000 feet. Such a design would not prove successful

as a general contractor's dredge unless a booster pump were
available.
It appears that a good cutterhead dredge pump value of horse-
power coefficient is 1.0. A satisfactory range would be 0.5 to 1.2
with the understanding that the low coefficient has limited pump-
ing distance and the high coefficient has a tendency toward high
wear. By adding booster pumps, the pumping distance can be ex-
tended as far as desired without excessive wear. It is questionable
practice to have a single pump coefficient over 1.2 on abrasive
materials.

RECOMMENDED PUMP HORSEPOWER

Fig. 7-3 is a tabulation of recommended horsepower ranges for
dredge pumps sized from 6 through 42 inches. These values have
been rounded off, and the designer should deviate from these fig-
ures to a reasonable degree in order to utilize standard, available
drives.
Dredge size Horsepower at approximate
in inches horsepower coefficient of
0.7 0.85 1.0
6 60 75 100
8 125 150 200
10 225 275 325
12 350 425 500
14 500 625 750
16 700 875 1025
18 950 1175 1400
20 1250 1525 1800
22 1600 1950 2250
24 2000 2400 2800
27 2650 3200 3800
30 3450 4200 5000
33 4400 5300 6300
36 5500 6600 7800
42 8000 9700 11500
Fig. 7-3. Recommended pump horsepower vs. line size.

The author readily acknowledges that many "successful"

dredges have applied pump horsepower in excess of the above.
Such dredges are candidates for larger pipe, which would result in
greater capacity, longer pumping distances, less wear, and greater
66 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 7-4. Concept of frameless dredge, ladder and spuds powered by hydraulic
cylinders. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corporation.

profits. See Fig. 8-3 for the effect on production of increasing a 20-
inch line to 24 inches with a 2,250 horsepower drive.

SUMMARY
It is difficult to overemphasize the importance of the relationship
of suction line size to discharge line size; friction head loss to line
size; and pump head and horsepower to discharge line size. These
relationships will determine the viability of the dredge as an eco-
nomic unit.
This page intentionally left blank
Fig. 8-0. Production chart—24-inch dredge, 24-inch suction.
 Chapter 8

PRODUCTION CHARTS

D R E D G E LAW VII
PRODUCTION IS LIMITED BY:
(A) SUCTION CONDITIONS (BAROMETRIC HEAD);
(B) PUMP HP (DISCHARGE HEAD REQUIREMENT);
AND (C) SLURRY VELOCITY (TRANSPORT CAPABILITY)

The seventh Dredge Law is a summary statement of the first six

laws. The production limitations expressed in Dredge Law VII are
clearly evident in the shape of the production charts shown in Figs.
8-0 through 8-7. Each figure has been calculated and produced by
a proprietary PC program developed by the author. The subject of
the figures is a 24-inch X 24-inch (610 mm) dredge with a dredge
efficiency of 40 percent and conventional pump characteristics of
HP, eye speed, and tip speed. A HP coefficient of 1.0 is used (2,822
HP); a maximum eye speed of 42 ft/sec (12.8 m/s); and a tip speed
of 113 ft/sec (34.45 m/s).
The production charts plot rate (cu yd/hr or cm/hr) against
equivalent straight line discharge length (feet or meters). Various
digging depths are shown to demonstrate the reduced rate at
deeper depths. On Fig. 8-0, the points at 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 foot
depths represent the meeting of the pump's barometric limitation
(ordinate) and its head limitation (abscissa). The point at 40 feet
is where the limiting velocity is encountered, i.e., where the max-
imum SG can no longer be carried in the suction line because of
inadequate velocity. Production falls rapidly after this point. The
last two 50-foot points on the chart are not barometrically limited,
but use arbitrarily reduced SGs to demonstrate the dredge's long-
line transport capabilities.
70 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 8-1. Production chart—610-mm dredge, 610-mm suction.

Fig. 8-2. Production chart—24-inch dredge. 24-inch vs. 27-inch suction.

PRODUCTION CHARTS 71

Fig. 8-3. Production chart: 24-inch suction, 20-inch vs. 24-inch discharge.

Fig. 8-4. Production chart: 24-inch dredge, with and without booster pump.
72 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 8-5. Production chart: 24-inch dredge, with and without ladder pump.

Fig. 8-6. Production chart: 24-inch dredge, with ladder pump and booster.
PRODUCTION CHARTS 73

Fig. 8-7. Production chart: 24L dredge including dredge and ladder pumps.

Each chart in this chapter demonstrates an important dredging

principle. The serious student of hydraulic dredging is encouraged
to study these charts and explanations carefully. Understanding the
charts and the underlying dredge laws constitutes a powerful tool
for the dredgeman.
Dredge Law V (Chapter 6) indicates that when digging depth
increases for a non-ladder pump dredge, production decreases. Fig.
8-0 confirms this, showing the maximum rate allowed by the bar-
ometric pressure at each designated depth (the point labels). The
rate is plotted against the maximum line length at each point, with
length limited by HP and/or head of the pump. Logically, the lower
rates can be pumped further.
Fig. 8-0 shows production rate at a 10-foot digging depth to be
about 1,350 cu yd/hr at any distance up to 6,300 feet. To pump less
than the maximum chart distance, the operator would reduce
pump RPM to reduce head, but he should still pump the same
optimum GPM of slurry, achieving the same 1,350 cu yd/hr. If the
drive is restricted by its speed range, it is possible a minimum
length of discharge line may have to be utilized to provide resis-
tance to establish the GPM of the pump at a reasonable velocity
for optimum operation.
74 THEORIES OF DREDGING

As the discharge line lengthens, the pump RPM should increase

to provide the head and horsepower to pump the slurry the greater
distance. At 4,000 feet, the torque limitation of the drive is en-
countered. The drive is normally not at full speed at this point,
which means that full horsepower has not been achieved on the
diesel engine. The horsepower capability of a diesel is roughly pro-
portional to its speed, i.e., if a 2,000 HP engine has a full speed
rating of 1,000 RPM, at 800 RPM its HP will be approximately 80
percent or 1,600 HP. Since HP = torque X RPM, torque capability
remains roughly constant within the operating speed range of the
engine.
At this point of torque limitation, the pump can transport the
1,350 cu yd/hr no further. Therefore, if the job demands a longer
line, the cubic yards per hour must be reduced. In so doing, the
lower production reduces the solids in the slurry which reduces
resistance in the line, lowering two major elements of horsepower,
specific gravity, and head (Equation 7-2).
As the line length increases, the production rate continues to
fall in order to keep the foot-pounds requirement of the hydraulic
transport system compatible with the capability of the pump and
drive. As the line increases in length, the pump eventually reaches
full speed and full horsepower (not apparent on the chart). At this
point the operator has no control left other than to reduce the
pickup of solids, lowering the specific gravity of the slurry. As the
discharge line continues to lengthen, the velocity and production
continue to fall (Dredge Law I), since RPM can no longer be in-
creased. At about 15,000 feet the velocity drops to the critical range
as indicated in the limiting velocity charts (explained in Dredge
Law III, Chapter 4). From this distance and beyond, the production
of the dredge drops so drastically that it raises the question of
economic justification of continuing without the addition of a
booster pump.
At each digging depth, the maximum output is represented by
the horizontal line at the designated depth. For example, at 30 feet
digging depth, the output is about 1,000 cu yd/hr. This production
can be maintained with proper operating techniques out to a dis-
tance of 12,000 feet where the torque limitation is encountered.
The chart then follows the same pattern as though the digging
depth were 10 feet because the dredge is no longer limited by
PRODUCTION CHARTS 75

barometric pressure, but by the drive torque capability which at

some line length is common to all digging depths.
At 50 feet digging depth the maximum output is less than 700
cu yd/hr, one half of the maximum output at 10 feet digging depth.
This suggests a useful rule of thumb for the dredgeman: The max-
imum output of a conventional cutterhead dredge at 50 feet dig-
ging depth is one-half of its output at 10 feet digging depth. The
50 feet digging depth horizontal production line intersects the outer
envelope of the chart at 15,500 feet (Fig. 8-0), where the chart is
common to all digging depths. Fig. 8-1 shows the same data as Fig.
8-0, but is expressed solely in the metric system for clarity.

SUCTION LINE SIZE

Dredge size is commonly expressed as the discharge line size. In
Fig. 8-0, the 24-inch dredge also has a suction line of 24 inches. In
each of Figs. 8-2 through 8-6, the production chart from Fig. 8-0
appears for comparison purposes. Each new chart shows the effect
of some design change on the slurry system, and is explained in
the text.
Fig. 8-2 shows the effect of increasing the suction line from 24
inches (610 mm) to 27 inches (686 mm). The short-line production
of the 27-inch suction is significantly increased over that of the 24-
inch. This is in accordance with Dredge Law IV (Chapter 5), which
states the maximum production of a dredge varies with the area
of the suction pipe. An obvious production advantage exists for the
27-inch suction on "short" lines; however, at about 8,000 feet, the
velocity limitation of the 27-inch suction line is reached and pro-
duction drops rapidly. Actually, there is an advantage for the 27-
inch suction out to about 9,000 feet if the digging depth is 40 feet.
Note that the maximum output of the 24-inch suction is slightly
over 800 cu yd/hr at a 40-foot depth, which corresponds to the 27-
inch rate at 9,000 feet.
Velocity limitation is not reached on the 24-inch suction until
15,000 feet, so a distinct production advantage is demonstrated for
the smaller suction diameter on "long" lines. The production rate
of the 24-inch suction doubles that of the 27-inch at 15,000 feet.
Also, if the digging depth were 10 feet, there would be an advan-
76 THEORIES OF DREDGING

tage for the 24-inch suction at all lengths beyond 7,000 feet. The
most advantageous size suction is a function of job conditions.
To say "use a large suction on short lines, and a small suction on
long lines" may have merit, but is too simplistic. The dredgeman
needs the data shown on the chart, including depth, to make the
right decision. For example, the 27-inch suction provides 880 cu
yd/hr (673 m3/hr) at a 50-foot (15 m) digging depth and 9,000-foot
(2,744 m) line length. The 24-inch suction provides only 680 cu yd/
hr (520 m3/hr) under those conditions; however, if the line length
were 15,500 feet (4,725 m), the 24-inch suction would give the same
680 cu yd/hr while the 27-inch would give only about 200 cu yd/hr.
The data supplied by the computer is essential to the operator's
ability to make the correct decisions for varying job conditions.
If a dredge is to be used on projects of unpredictable line
length, it is feasible to use a suction somewhat larger than the
discharge line, but rarely if ever should it be more than 12.5 percent
larger (the 27/24 ratio). This provides a suction area 26.6 percent
greater, so the long line production rate will be compromised as
Fig. 8-2 shows. The author has seen dredges with disparately large
suctions that severely hampered output, e.g., a 34/27 ratio where
the suction was 58.6 percent greater than the discharge. Here, in
order to induce the desirable 15 SG slurry on coarse sand in the
suction at 18.7 ft/sec, an exorbitant discharge velocity of 29.6 ft/
sec would occur, resulting in a very short line length capability and
high wear. A larger discharge should be used under such circum-
stances, unless the dredge pump is underpowered, in which case
the suction should be reduced.

DISCHARGE LINE SIZE

Fig. 8-3 shows the effect of replacing the 24-inch discharge line
with a 20-inch size on the subject dredge while retaining the 24-
inch suction. This 24-inch/20-inch configuration has been widely
used in practice, but it should be noted that there is a difference
of 20 percent in diameter and 44 percent in area.
Since the suction line is 24 inches in both cases, the maximum
or short line production is 1,350 cu yd/hr (Dredge Law IV). How
ever, the torque limitation of the drive on the 20-inch discharge
line is reached at about 2,000 feet, compared to more than 6,000
PRODUCTION CHARTS 77

feet for the 24-inch line. The resistance of the smaller line versus
the larger is doubled at the same GPM.
The author recalls two cases where different line sizes were
used with this basic dredge, one successfully and one not so suc-
cessfully. A European company wanted a dredge to pump a soft,
loamy material a few thousand feet. A suction and discharge line
of 27 inches was applied to the dredge (no change in the 24-inch
pump). The material dug easily, dispersed well, and partially be-
cause of the lighter organics, conveyed readily. The job was emi-
nently successful, and the dredge owner completed the job in
about two-thirds of the scheduled time.
The second case was the application by an American owner on
sand, again on a few thousand feet of line. Here, however, the
owner had thousands of feet of 20-inch pipe on hand which he
used over the protests of the dredge builder. The result was, as
shown in Fig. 8-3, a low production beyond 6,000 feet, plus high
fuel costs and high wear on the pump and pipeline.
The first owner held the opinion that his dredge pump was the
finest unit in the industry. The second owner held a much less
flattering view of his unit. Of course, the pumps were identical,
making the point that even the best of equipment can fail to per-
form satisfactorily if improperly applied.
Numerous dredges exist today with discharge lines 44 percent
smaller in area than their suction lines. There is little or no merit
to this relationship; it reduces production rate and line length, and
increases HP and wear rate. In most such cases (small dredges are
less affected), owners would be well advised to change to a larger
discharge line, but never larger than the suction.
It is feasible to replace worn pipe sections with a new larger
line, operating with two sizes of pipe in a common discharge line.
The sizes should not be intermixed, i.e., all the smaller size pipe
should be contiguous. This avoids the high friction losses incurred
by multiple size transitions.

BOOSTER PUMP EFFECT

Fig. 8-4 shows the effect of adding a 2,822-horsepower booster
pump in the discharge line of the dredge. Dredge Law VI states
78 THEORIES OF DREDGING

that the line length against which a dredge can pump is propor-
tional to pump horsepower. Note that the original dredge pump,
also 2,822 horsepower, had the line length capability of slightly
more than 6,000 feet. With the booster pump, the distance is in-
creased to 13,000 feet, somewhat more than twice as far. The ex-
planation for the extra few hundred feet is that the resistance of
the suction line was overcome by the dredge pump in both cases,
leaving the booster some extra horsepower for discharge line
length.
Note the effectiveness of the booster pump in increasing pro-
duction on long lines. At 20,000 feet, the dredge pump alone would
produce less than 400 cu yd/hr. With the booster added, the pro-
duction is just under 1,200 cu yd/hr at a digging depth of 20 feet
(6m).

LADDER PUMP EFFECT

Fig. 8-5 shows the effect of adding a submerged pump to the oth-
erwise identical dredge. The HP of the ladder pump is 705, 25 per-
cent of the dredge pump's default value. Whereas previously the
maximum dredge output was 680 cu yd/hr at the 50-foot digging
depth, it now shows just under 1,700 cu yd/hr. However, the dredge
pump HP has not changed, and line length limitations still apply.
The small amount of ladder pump HP not utilized for the suction
does increase system head, allowing a slightly longer discharge
line.
The ladder pump should be designed to create enough head
(perhaps 60-90 feet as a function of depth) to overcome all suction
losses and provide a modest positive pressure at the dredge pump.
This breaks the barometric bottleneck and prevents cavitation. A
larger ladder pump with more HP and head could be used, but the
effect would only be longer discharge line capability. Longer lines
can normally be achieved more economically with surface-
mounted equipment; however, on short line operations such as
sand and gravel, it can be more economical to use a ladder pump
only, i.e., no hull pump. The second pump is avoided by increasing
the ladder pump HP and head sufficiently to overcome the resis-
tance of the short discharge line.
PRODUCTION CHARTS 79

The suction line size of a ladder pump dredge should be the

same as the dredge discharge line. Some dredges have used a
larger suction, perhaps as a holdover from the conventional
dredge. The reason for the larger suction on the conventional
dredge is to mitigate the effects of the limited barometric pressure.
Since the ladder pump eliminates the barometric limitation, the
larger line unnecessarily reduces the pickup velocity, lowering the
potential SG and production rate. It also causes SG fluctuations,
complicating rate calculations.
In Fig. 8-5, the reader should not be confused by the close
proximity of the ladder pump curve to that of the dredge pump
alone. There is a large advantage to the ladder pump dredge, be-
cause all rates are achievable at a 50-foot digging depth. The con-
ventional dredge will produce less than 700 cu yd/hr at a 50-foot
depth, whereas the ladder pump dredge produces up to 1,700 cu
yd/hr on short lines. The advantage of the ladder pump diminishes
(but never disappears) when the dredge is digging at shallow
depths. See Chapter 14 for further discussion.
Fig. 8-6 shows a 2,822 HP booster added to the 24-inch ladder
pump dredge of Fig. 8-5. This provides a significant increase in
operating range for the higher production of the non-barometrically
limited dredge.
Fig. 8-7 shows the 24-inch "L" dredge chart on fine sand. The
point values are the same as the middle curve on Fig. 8-6, but the
point labels are slurry velocity, not depth as used on the "D"
dredges. Depth is an insignificant factor for the "L" dredge as the
ladder pump breaks the barometric bottleneck.
Fig. 8-8 shows the 24-inch x 24-inch "D" dredge on four com-
mon materials. Having the materials on a common chart highlights
the differences in production rate and line length, attributable to
the materials alone. In planning the project, failure to distinguish
between fine sand and coarse sand would inject a significant error.
At 10,000 feet, the chart shows the dredge has over twice the ca-
pacity on fine sand as on coarse sand. A computer program to
highlight these facts in graphical form is invaluable to the operator.
Fig. 8-9 shows the 24-inch "L" dredge on the same materials as
Fig. 8-8. The "L" dredge has great advantages over the "D" dredge.
Its first and operating costs are somewhat higher, but its increased
capacity at depths greater than 25-30 feet is such as to justify the
extra costs easily.
80 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 8-8. Production chart: 24D dredge for various materials.

Fig. 8-9. Production chart: 24L dredge for various materials.

PRODUCTION CHARTS 81

Fig. 8-10. Cutterhead dredge with spud barge to increase swing width and dredge
efficiency.

SUMMARY
The production of a conventional dredge is limited by suction con-
ditions, pump horsepower, and slurry velocity. The judicious ap-
plication of the Dredge Laws can lead the way to increased pro-
duction by identifying the bottleneck and indicating the equipment
or change required to break it.
 Chapter 9

THE DREDGE CYCLE

The first eight chapters have expounded upon the fundamentals of

the hydraulic functions of a dredge. It is now useful to view in
simple graphical form the fluctuations through which the dredge
passes hydraulically when performing on the job.
A centrifugal pump accelerates the passing liquid to a velocity
somewhat greater than the tip speed of the impeller (Chapter 1).
This velocity is partially converted to pressure head by the volute.
The total generated head is the same for any Newtonian liquid,
regardless of its specific gravity. However, if the specific gravity is
other than 1.0, head must be multiplied by specific gravity in order
to convert to equivalent water head, the unit normally used in
dredge calculations. Fig. 9-1 shows the dredge cycle in simplistic
form with head expressed in feet of water.

HEAD-CAPACITY CURVE ON WATER

Line E-B is a portion of the pump head-capacity curve on water.
This curve is normally provided by the pump manufacturer, and
the curve shown is typical for a given RPM. As long as the pump
is running at the given RPM, the head and GPM will meet at some
point on this curve. It cannot deviate from this curve while pump-
ing water unless RPM is changed.

SYSTEM RESISTANCE ON WATER

Curve ABC is the system resistance on water, representing the flow
resistance of the system's line size and length at varying rates of
flow. At zero flow, the resistance is zero (point A). As the GPM
rises, the resistance rises as a function of the velocity squared
THE DREDGE CYCLE 83
THE DREDGE CYCLE

B WATER WATER
C SLURRY WATER
0 SLURRY SLURRY
E WATER SLURRY

Fig. 9-1. The dredge cycle.

(h ~ V2). At point B, the system resistance curve intersects pump

head-capacity curve, establishing the point at which the pump will
force water through the system. If the line were lengthened or
reduced in diameter, curve ABC would become steeper and would
intersect the head-capacity curve at a point representing a higher
head and a lower GPM.

HEAD-CAPACITY CURVE ON SLURRY

Curve DC is the pump head-capacity curve when operating on
slurry with a specific gravity greater than 1.0. Chapter 1 explained
that the pressure created by a centrifugal pump is a direct function
of the specific gravity of the fluid, but mitigated by the non-New-
tonian effect of the slurry. With the head of the pump on slurry
84 THEORIES OF DREDGING

expressed in feet of water head (note the ordinate label), the pump
head-capacity curve on slurry is above that for water.

SYSTEM RESISTANCE ON SLURRY

Curve AED is the system resistance on slurry. For a given line size
and length, the resistance to the flow of slurry is greater than for
water; therefore, the slurry system curve is steeper than that for
water.

DREDGE CYCLE EXPLAINED

The dredge cycle can be examined within the constraints of the
four curves described on Fig. 9-1. Point A represents an inactive
system, with the pump turned off. At any point on the water system
curve above A, the pump is operating and being brought up to
speed. At point B, the pump is at the speed for which the head
capacity curve was plotted, and the system functions at the head
and capacity indicated on their coordinates by B.
Note that at point B, only water is in the pump and discharge
line. Now the operator lowers his cutter into the bottom, starts to
swing the dredge, and picks up solids. Abruptly, slurry reaches the
pump, which, at the same RPM, produces a greater pressure by
shifting to point C on the higher specific gravity slurry pump curve.
Since only water is in the discharge line, the GPM and water head
immediately increase from B to C.
As the pump continues to force slurry into the discharge line,
the resistance of the line increases along curve CD (it cannot leave
this curve while at the same RPM on a given slurry) until the line
is full of slurry at point D. At this point the system head has in-
creased and the GPM decreased from C.
Point D occurs at the completion of a dredge cut or swing;
next, the swing is reversed and the cutter passes over an area
already excavated. This results in water at 1.0 specific gravity en-
tering the pump, and, abruptly, the pump performs at point E on
curve EB (water). With less head to induce velocity, GPM drops
because the system is still providing the high resistance of a dis-
charge line full of slurry.
THE DREDGE CYCLE 85

Fig. 9-2. Dredge Leonardo DaVinci, a powerful European 36-inch cutterhead

dredge, with rare self-propulsion. Courtesy: IHC.

As water displaces the slurry in the discharge line, the oper-

ating point moves along the pump head-capacity curve EB, reflect-
ing a decreased resistance in the line and an increased flow. At
point B, the system is at its starting point, where only water is in
the system.
Obviously, there are many variations of the dredge cycle, e.g.,
the percent solids in the slurry can be anywhere between zero and
maximum, the discharge line retention time may be longer than
the dredge cycle, and the line therefore would almost never be 100
percent slurry or 100 percent water. If, however, we assume the
slurry pump curve on Fig. 9-1 represents the performance on max-
imum percent solids slurry, then the envelope as represented by
ABCDE provides the outer constraints of the system. Infinite var-
iations within this envelope are possible.
The reader will possibly detect an element of perversity in the
dredge cycle, i.e., the highest velocity occurs at point C when the
discharge line is full of water and high velocity is unnecessary;
conversely, the lowest velocity occurs at point E when the line is
full of slurry, and high velocity is essential to prevent deposition.
Without some form of velocity control, the dredge will burn fuel
unnecessarily for pumping excessive water, or will jeopardize pro-
86 THEORIES OF DREDGING

duction by having too low a velocity on slurry. See Chapter 17 for

a discussion of velocity control.

SUMMARY
The dredge pump creates head in proportion to the specific gravity
of the fluid it impels, while the pipeline frictional resistance, hF,
increases with fluid specific gravity. Since the slurry specific gravity
handled by a dredge varies from 1.0 to about 1.5, the dredge cycle
passes through broad variations which require understanding by
the operator in order to optimize his operations.
 Chapter 10

FLOW REGIME AND FRICTION

FRICTION HEAD LOSSES

One of the most difficult problems for the dredgeman is the pre-
diction of friction losses. When one considers the various flow re-
gimes in the slurry pipe; the nature of the solids which vary from
flocculates through Bingham plastics to noncohesive gravel; the
solids concentrations which cause the slurry specific gravity to
vary from 1.0 to 1.6; then one understands why Herbich3 states:
It is therefore not surprising that no simple theory and no clear-cut
methods are available for estimating slurry head losses for engineer-
ing purposes.
Considerable time has been spent developing mathematical
models for slurries with a single particle size, but the practical
value of such models to the dredgeman is negligible since he never
encounters such materials. While many studies have been made of
slurry rheology, the infinite diversity of the slurries encountered by
the dredgeman responds better to the extrapolation of actual test
data and operating experience than to the academic formulas.
However, when data is lacking, formulas may represent the best
information available, and indeed may be essential.

FLOW REGIMES
Of paramount importance to friction head losses is the flow regime
within the pipe. Herbich3 has defined the four identified slurry flow
regimes as homogeneous, heterogeneous, moving bed, and station-
ary bed.
Fig. 10-1 shows the pipe cross-section for the first three flow
regimes above. The homogeneous regime is high velocity, and un-
88 THEORIES OF DREDGING

Fig. 10-1. Sediment distribution in a pipeline, (a) homogeneous flow; (b) hetero-
geneous flow; (c) flow with a moving bed. Reprinted, by permission, from Herbich,
Coastal and Deep Ocean Dredging, 297.

economic in terms of power and wear. The heterogeneous regime

is the most economic for solids transport. The moving bed regime
reduces production and is uneconomic, but is not uncommon on
dredges. The stationary bed is uncommon because of its low pro-
ductivity, and should be avoided. The heterogeneous regime should
be used when possible. This desirable regime occurs in the vicinity
of the 1.5 specific gravity optimums shown on Fig. 4-1 as a function
of velocity and the nature and percent of the solids.
FLOW REGIME AND FRICTION 89

HEAD LOSS CALCULATION FROM OPERATING DATA

The forward-thinking operator should always be aware of the ma-
terial he is pumping and log his conditions so as to be able to
calculate his frictional losses per 100 feet of equivalent line length.
When frictional aberrations occur, they should be analyzed as to
cause, e.g., shell, gravel, clay, etc. It is a relatively simple matter
to calculate the loss per 100 feet, but in order for it to have sig-
nificance, the velocity, solids concentration, and solids sieve anal-
ysis must be known. Using the discharge pressure gauge reading,
the following equation applies:
2.31P + hG = hp + (hTE X SGS) (Equation 10-1}
Or hp = 2.31 P + hG - (hTE X SGS)
Where P = gauge pressure in psi
hG = feet of gauge above water level
hF = total friction head in feet of water
hTE = terminal elevation of pipe discharge in feet
above water level
Assume that the SG of the slurry is 1.25; the equivalent line length
is 4,000; the gauge is 20 feet above water level and reads 80 psig*;
and the terminal elevation is 10 feet; then calculate as follows:
2.31 X 80 + 20 = hF + 10 X 1.25
204.8 = hF + 12.5
hF = 192.3 total friction head in feet of water
192 3
hp/100 feet = —J- x 100 = 4.81 ft/100 ft
4,000
No theoretical formula can compete with the accuracy of this
simple calculation. However, the dredgeman is faced with the ne-
cessity of predicting total friction head, hB prior to actual opera-
tion since he must submit a bid in advance which includes the
necessary pumps and boosters. It is therefore recommended that
the operator, in preparing his bids, refer back to his prior operating
experience for similar material and conditions for the best predic-
tion of his future performance.
*Note that if the gauge is read in the lever room, the elevation correction, hG, may be roughly
equivalent to hTE; so many operators simply equate hF to gauge reading X 2.31.
90 THEORIES OF DREDGING

In the event there is no appropriate prior experience, there is

still good information available. For sands and gravel, there is
much data and experience on which the production curves and
limiting velocity curves (Chapter 4) are based. It should be noted
that these materials are classified by their median grain size, d50,
and are ungraded, noncohesive, and have little or no clay content.

SOIL TYPES
As far as the rheology of dredge hydraulic transport systems is
concerned, there are three broad classes of soils: cohesive, non-
cohesive, and mitigated.
Cohesive materials are soils with a fines content (usually clay)
of such affinity that the soil does not separate and disperse readily
in the slurry. Noncohesive materials are sands and gravels (with
little or no clay or other cohesives) which disperse readily into
discrete granules. Mitigated materials are those which are made
up largely of noncohesive materials, but whose rheological char-
acteristics are mitigated by a percentage of clays and/or silts. These
mitigating clays have the effect of increasing the specific gravity of
the conveying medium; of providing some aspects of what Stepan-
off13 called "plug flow" regime; and, in effect, acting as a lubricant
for the system. Many operators have been pleasantly surprised by
the reduction in friction loss for a material with some clay or other
mitigating fines.
Huston2 suggests in calculating slurry friction losses that water
losses be computed, and then multiplied by the specific gravity of
the slurry. This is a reasonable procedure on cohesive soils such
as the silt and mud found in many maintenance projects, and on
mitigated soils where the system is "lubricated." However, test data
and actual dredge operations have disclosed instances where the
water multipliers exceed 2.0, so that the specific gravity multiple
is not universally applicable.

C FACTORS FOR HAZEN-WILLIAMS EQUATION

The use of specific gravity as a water friction multiplier fails to
consider the different friction losses of fine, medium, and coarse
sand and gravel, and is therefore limited in its application. For
FLOW REGIME AND FRICTION 91

accuracy in calculating friction losses of various materials at var-

ying concentrations, it is necessary to have a proven equation and
a guide for selecting the friction factors to be utilized with the
equation. The Fanning equation, Equation 6-2, is used by some, but
more favored is the well-tested, empirical Hazen-Williams equation
as follows:

Where f = slurry friction loss per 100 feet of pipe expressed in

feet of water
d = inside diameter of pipe in inches
q = GPM
C = friction factor taken from Fig. 10-2

Velocity (or GPM) and pipe inside diameter in inches must be

known, and "C" determinate in order to calculate f.
Fig. 10-2 shows estimated "C" values as a function of d50 (me-
dian grain size) and slurry specific gravity. This chart has been
developed from practical data acquired over the years from many

Fig. 10-2. Hazen-Williams "C" friction factor.

92 THEORIES OF DREDGING

sources. It is presented, not as a precision instrument (since lab-

oratory data is unavailable), but as a highly useful tool in the pre-
diction of friction losses in the absence of better data. There may
be instances where d50 on the chart will not truly reflect the rhe-
ology of the slurry because of abnormal grain distribution; or
where a lubricating clay mitigates the rheology to increase the "C"
value by perhaps 10 points, thus reducing losses. Even with pos-
sible inaccuracies, this chart, Fig. 10-2, along with the Hazen-Wil-
liams equation (soluble quickly with the common hand-held sci-
entific calculators) constitutes a good method of prediction of
friction losses, perhaps as good as any method, other than that of
actual operating data on similar material.
It should be emphasized that use of "C" values from Fig. 10-2
results in friction losses expressed mfeet of water, not slurry. For
this and other reasons, it is acknowledged that some operators use
"C" values that differ from those above. The operator should cling
to his own data if it works for him, but remain flexible and rec-

Fig. 10-3. 24-inch Australian mineral mining dredge with bucketwheel excavator.
Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.
FLOW REGIME AND FRICTION 93

ognize that hF varies with type and percent of solids (from zero to
50 percent) and size and shape of solids (from microns to cobbles).
It is incumbent upon each operator to adopt a method of cal-
culating friction that allows him to predict losses with accuracy,
and thus to bid with confidence. The Hazen and Williams friction
formula used with Fig. 10-2 has been used with good success. Com-
puterized calculation is recommended.

SUMMARY
Slurry friction losses vary with the type and concentration of solids
being pumped, as well as the flow regime within the pipe. The
Hazen-Williams friction factor, used in conjunction with Fig. 10-2
and a personal computer, is perhaps the most satisfactory way to
predict friction; however, good historical data has been used suc-
cessfully by operators who were alert enough to ensure that similar
conditions were being compared.
 Chapter 11

CAVITATION

There are no good results from dredge pump cavitation. It disrupts

the dredging function and can cause equipment damage. It is es-
sential that the operator learn to minimize cavitation.
Much has been learned and written about the theory of cavi-
tation; however, the dredge operator's interest lies not so much in
the arcane theory, as in being able to predict and avoid the circum-
stances that cause it. This chapter is devoted to that end.

DEFINITION
The cavitation phenomenon occurs when the static pressure at the
impeller eye of the pump falls below the vapor pressure of the
liquid being pumped. This results in liquid (normally water) vapor-
ization, which forms low pressure "cavities" in the slurry. These
cavities later implode, often with audible effect, causing physical
stress and potential damage to the pump metal in the area of the
implosion.
Perhaps the simplest concept of cavitation is to visualize the
slurry entering the rotating impeller through the eye. Each impeller
vane terminates at the periphery of the eye at the front shroud. As
long as there is adequate suction head to keep the slurry in close
contact with the trailing surfaces of the moving vanes, all is well;
however, as RPM increases and vane velocity at the eye periphery
(commonly called eye speed) exceeds the ability of the slurry to
keep pace, the vane "runs away" from the slurry, forming cavities
of water vapor, i.e., cavitation. Unless the dredge is equipped with
a method to augment the suction head, (normally supplied by bar-
ometric pressure only) the dredge will inevitably encounter
cavitation.
CAVITATION 95

When cavitation occurs, the pump tries to pump the water va-
por, a fluid lighter than air. Since the discharge pressure created
by the pump is a function of the specific gravity of the fluid being
pumped (Chapter 1), the pressure created with 100 percent water
vapor is so low as to be immeasurable by normal dredge instru-
ments. The practical effect of full cavitation is a cessation of liquid
pumping. This not only stops dredge production (i.e., the transport
of solids), but allows settlement of the suspended solids in the
slurry, resulting in potential choking of the pipe.

CAVITATION CHART
The graph of Fig. 11-1 is a reasonable approximation of the capa-
bilities of a well-designed dredge pump. It shows the relationship
between the pump's eye speed and the maximum vacuum the
pump can create. Eye speed is the peripheral velocity of the open-
ing through the front shroud of the pump impeller, expressed in
feet per second. Vacuum is "negative pressure," a misnomer re-
flecting the extent to which the absolute suction pressure is re-
duced below barometric pressure. It is read by a gauge immedi-
ately ahead of the pump, and is traditionally expressed in inches
of mercury (feet of water would be preferable for ease in calcu-

Fig. 11-1. Cavitation limits of eye speed vs. vacuum.

96 THEORIES OF DREDGING

lations). From Fig. 11-1, it is obvious that as eye speed increases,

vacuum capability decreases. Since required vacuum increases as
a function of slurry velocity and specific gravity (SG), it becomes
apparent that the productivity and economics of the dredge depend
upon the ability of the pump to create a high vacuum.

EYE SPEED
Examination of the graph discloses that at an eye speed of 30 ft/
sec, the pump can create a vacuum of 27-inch mercury (Hg). At 42
ft/sec, the vacuum has dropped a small amount, so the question
arises, "should the pump always operate at a maximum eye speed
of 30 ft/sec?" The answer is "no." As the eye speed is reduced, so
is the peripheral tip speed of the impeller, which determines the
head created by the pump. Since head is a function of the square
of the tip speed, this means that at an eye speed of 30 ft/sec, the
impeller tip generates a head only 49 percent of that at 42 ft/sec,
and thus will pump only about 49 percent as far. Also, since flow
varies directly as the pump speed, the GPM will be only 71 percent
as high. Further, pump HP varies as the cube of RPM, so the HP
utilized will only be 36 percent of that at 42 ft/sec.
Obviously, the dredge designer must optimize the pump speed
and HP for the project conditions to be encountered. The com-
plexities of this process are beyond the scope of this chapter, but
a good compromise for eye speed is 40-42 ft/sec, at full prime
mover speed and HP. Perhaps an inch of vacuum is lost versus 30
ft/sec, but this is a small price for the increased capability in flow
rate, head, and productivity of a contract dredge. On short-line
dredges, such as used in some aggregate operations, an eye speed
of 30-40 ft/sec may be appropriate when using a standard, com-
mercial pump; however, on contract dredges with variable project
conditions, the 42 ft/sec is a reasonable and economic design
criterion.
Further examination of the graph discloses that at about 61 ft/
sec eye speed, the pump has no vacuum capability. Long before
this point is reached, however, the dredge pump has passed its
maximum practical operating speed, because it must generate sub-
stantial vacuum in order to pick up solids, to generate velocity
head, and to overcome the losses in the suction line. The previ-
CAVITATION 97

Fig. 11-2. Great Lakes 30-inch dredge, Alaska, with ladder pump and anchor
booms. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.

ously stated 42 ft/sec is a good eye speed for a dredge pump; how-
ever, if the vacuum requirements never exceed 15-inch Hg (e.g., a
booster pump) the eye speed can be increased to about 55 ft/sec
to take advantage of the longer line length capability (assuming
adequate HP availability). Also, a dredge pump with an eye speed
of 45-50 ft/sec can function on long lines by lowering the vacuum
to pick up less solids; however, the HP of the prime mover must
be increased to handle the higher speed, which means that under
"normal" project conditions, the available hp is not utilized. Simi-
larly, for a dredge often pumping against long lines, an eye speed
up to 45 ft/sec is not unreasonable; however, if a booster pump is
used, the operation would be more effective if the dredge pump
were designed for a maximum of 42 ft/sec.

NET POSITIVE SUCTION HEAD REQUIREMENT

Operators have noted that their dredge pump does not always cav-
itate at the same vacuum. The graph, with its formula for vacuum,
demonstrates this. The formula states that vacuum expressed in
98 THEORIES OF DREDGING

feet of water equals barometric pressure (assumed as 34 feet) mi-

nus the net positive suction head required (NPSHR) plus the ve-
locity head (velocity squared divided by 64.4). NPSHR is a concept
not essential to the average operator, so we can dismiss it by rec-
ognizing it as a calculated value of suction head required for the
pump to operate under the given conditions.
NPSHR is normally determined by the pump manufacturer
from tests, and should be provided with the pump curves. NPSHR
increases with eye size, and therefore it is recommended that eye
diameter never exceed the inside diameter of the suction pipe.
Some operators have increased eye diameter in an effort to pass
larger particles through the pump, but this often comes at a high
operating price and is seldom, if ever, the most effective way to
achieve the objective.

IMPELLER GEOMETRY AND SPEED

Most dredge pumps will generate a maximum head of about 240-
260 feet with a vane tip speed of 113 ft/sec. With an eye speed of
42 ft/sec, this provides a ratio of 113/42 = 2.69. This ratio of im-
peller diameter to eye diameter normally provides satisfactory per-
formance if the pump speed and HP are properly matched. An
increase in tip speed allows longer lines (assuming the eye is di-
minished to avoid cavitation), but requires higher HP, and results
in higher wear. A decrease in tip speed has the reverse effect.

SUMMARY
Cavitation can devastate the performance of a hydraulic dredge. It
behooves the operator to obtain well-designed pumps with
matched drives, and to operate within their capabilities. He should
also recognize the following principles:
1. The ability of a dredge pump to create vacuum is reduced as eye
speed increases.
2. Normal impeller eye speed should not exceed 42 ft/min (12.8 m/
min).
3. The eye diameter should not exceed the inside diameter (ID) of
the suction line; it is acceptable practice to make it the size of the
discharge line ID.
 PART II
DREDGING IN PRACTICE
Dredge R. N. Weeks filling its hopper. Courtesy: Weeks Marine Inc.
 Chapter 12

SELECTING THE DREDGE TYPE

Hydraulic dredges are characterized by the use of a centrifugal

pump to induce a high velocity water stream in a pipeline in which
solids are entrained and transported to their discharge area. They
are further categorized by their method of excavation, i.e., by the
nature of the intake element in contact with the dredged material.
The major types are plain suction, trailing suction, and cutterhead.

PLAIN SUCTION
This is the simplest form of hydraulic dredge and uses no exca-
vator. It is sometimes equipped with water jets to agitate the
dredged material to facilitate solids entrainment by the water en-
tering the suction mouth. This dredge is limited in application to
relatively soft and free-flowing materials, and is not easily adapt-
able to digging channels since it cannot be swung across the chan-
nel continuously without danger of structural failure. It is used
primarily for "winning" or acquiring material from the waterway
by creating a large inverted cone in the bottom. Its efficiency can
be high and its cost per cubic yard low when properly applied, but
its application is severely limited by its inability to excavate, to dig
a channel, or to mine a horizontal stratum.
The dustpan dredge, Fig. 12-2, is a form of plain suction dredge
which derives its name from its special suction head (Fig. 12-3)
which may be 30 feet in width or greater. It is equipped with mul-
tiple jets to agitate the bottom material. The dredge is pulled for-
ward (normally against the current) by crossed wires attached to
upstream anchors. It sweeps a broad straight channel, and is per-
haps the most effective tool available for the quick removal of
shoals. It pulls its discharge line along behind it, utilizing an ingen-
102 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 12-1. Dredge diagram Spuler VI with plain suction convertible to cutterhead.
Courtesy: Philipp Holzmann.

ious discharge barge incorporating a baffle against which the pipe-

line discharges its slurry. The reacting forces position the barge in
the shallows or wherever the operator may direct for the deposi-
tion of the material. The dustpan dredge has seen limited appli-
cation in the industry and deserves to be better known for its high
capacity and low cost.

TRAILING SUCTION
The trailing suction dredge, Fig. 12-4, is a self-propelled, ocean-
going vessel generally compartmented into several hoppers. The
most common configuration has two dragarms, one on each side
SELECTING THE DREDGE TYPE 103

Fig. 12-2. Dredge Lenel Bean, 18-inch dustpan. Courtesy: C. F. Bean Corporation.

of the ship, mounted outboard and connected to the hull near the
center of buoyancy to minimize the effect of the sea state.
Other configurations may involve only one dragarm mounted
on one side of the vessel, or at the stern on the ship's centerline.
Each dragarm has its own draghead for contact with the bottom
and with minor exceptions, serves its own separate pump.
Some trailing suction dredges have no hoppers and discharge
their loads overboard through extended, cantilevered discharge
lines. These dredges are called "sidecasters." The more common
"hopper dredge" discharges into its own distribution system which
is frequently so versatile as to allow either or both pumps to direct
the effluent to any of the several hopper compartments.
While dredging, the vessel is underway at about 2 or 3 knots,
with the draghead trailing from the trunnion-mounted dragarm so
as to absorb the motion of the hull in the sea state without ill
effect. Effluent is pumped into the hoppers where the solids tend
to settle to the bottom. After the hoppers are full, overflow to the
sea begins. This overflow is water with some solids content as a
function of the settling time available. When the economical solids
104 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 12-3. Typical dustpan head. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.

load has been taken on, the dragheads are elevated, and the ship
proceeds to the dumping ground, frequently in deep water, where
the bottom hopper doors open and the load is discharged. The
dredge then returns to the dredging grounds for another load.
Hopper dredges were developed for maintenance work, the
first being the General Moultrie in 1855 for work on the Charleston,
South Carolina, bar. They were intended for soft or free-flowing
materials. However, with the appropriate draghead, Fig. 12-5, they
have proved capable of dredging surprisingly difficult virgin
material.
Hopper dredges are advantageous in busy channels or harbors
where traffic and operating conditions preclude the use of station-
ary (swinging) cutterheads with their attendant pipelines. They are
also capable of operating in a sea state of several feet which would
inactivate the normal cutterhead dredge. They can mobilize quickly
since they are able to proceed under their own power, and require
less in the way of support craft than the cutterhead. They achieve
rapid improvement in a channel by traveling the full length of the
SELECTING THE DREDGE TYPE 105

Fig. 12-4. Split hull hopper dredge. Courtesy: Twin City Shipyard, Inc.

channel while not blocking it, whereas a mechanical or cutterhead

dredge proceeds laboriously in perhaps 3- to 6-ft deep cuts across
a wide channel, effectively blocking a portion or all of the channel.
Similarly, the hopper dredge can excavate deep cuts the full length
of a shoal so as to concentrate the current flow and induce scour-
ing. They are also advantageous where the dumping grounds are
unavailable for a cutterhead, or are so distant as to be uneco-
nomical to pump. These advantages are such as to probably always
assure the existence of a number of hopper dredges.
The hopper dredge has disadvantages; it is built to satisfy
"ocean" classification and is therefore quite costly. It requires man-
ning in accordance with oceangoing marine practices, also costly.
Further, when transporting its load to the dumping ground, it is
certainly one of the most expensive dump-scows ever devised. It
cannot dredge irregular patterns, operate near piers or other ob-
structions, or operate in shallow water; neither can it dredge some
hard materials successfully, which can be dug by cutterheads. It
106 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 12-5. Dragheads.

SELECTING THE DREDGE TYPE 107

also requires double handling of material whenever dry land dep-

osition of the dredged material is required. These disadvantages
assure that the hopper dredge will always be supplemented by
other forms of dredges, particularly the cutterhead.

CUTTERHEAD
The most common and most versatile hydraulic dredge is the cut-
terhead, Fig. 12-6, which is equipped with a rotating cutter (exca-
vator) surrounding the intake of the suction line. The cutter ex-
cavates and translates the bottom materials into the influence of
the high velocity water at the suction intake, where the solids are
entrained, passed through the dredge pump to the floating dis-
charge line, and on to the deposition area through the shore pipe.
The conventional cutterhead dredge is held in position by two
spuds at the stern of the dredge, only one of which can be down
(i.e., in the bottom) while swinging. There are two swing anchors
some distance from either side of the dredge which are connected

Fig. 12-6. A 24-inch cutterhead dredge. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corporation.

108 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

by wire rope (through swing sheaves on the ladder mounted near

the cutter) to the swing winches. The dredge swings to port and
starboard alternately, while passing the cutter through the bottom
material until the proper depth is achieved. Most cutterheads ad-
vance by "walking" themselves forward on their spuds. This is ac-
complished by swinging the dredge to the port on the port spud
an appropriate distance. Then the starboard spud is dropped and
the port spud raised. When the dredge is swung an equal distance
to the starboard, the port spud is dropped and the starboard spud
is raised. The dredge has now advanced a cutterhead length and
is on course, if the proper advance angles are used.
The cutterhead dredge has most of the advantages of the other
type dredges, and can perform on a continuous basis with resultant
improvements in efficiency and costs. It can operate in an identical
fashion to the plain suction dredge, but can also dig a specified
channel including slopes as required. It can dig the same channels
and with more precise control than the trailing suction dredge,
while discharging to an upland disposal area. If the disposal area
is distant, several miles or more, the cutterhead can discharge into
barges for economical transport, not interrupting the dredging cy-
cle as with the hopper dredge. Its great versatility, continuous op-
eration, and moderate costs have earned it its appellation as the
workhorse of the industry.
The cutterhead dredge does have disadvantages, however, and
they are its inability (1) to handle large particles such as boulders,
slabs, stumps, etc., and (2) to work under heavy sea conditions.
Particle size limitations will be discussed in Chapter 13 under
pump design, but it should be noted that proper clearing and/or
blasting of the area to be dredged, along with proper design of the
pump impeller, goes a long way toward removing this disadvan-
tage. As for coping with a heavy sea state, there are several
schemes to adapt the cutterhead dredge to heavy seas, including
patent #3,777,376 issued to this author and associates.

COMPENSATED CUTTERHEAD DREDGE

Fig. 12-7 shows the patented, compensated cutterhead dredge, ad-
justable to cope with varying sea and soil conditions. This dredge
was intended to operate successfully in seas of at least two meters.
SELECTING THE DREDGE TYPE 109

Fig. 12-7. Sell-compensated cutterhead dredge. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corporation.

It has an articulated, compensated ladder assuring high dredge ef-

ficiency, and preventing the dredge's destruction when operating
in open water. The principle of a gas-charged, hydraulic compen-
sating device has been proven on floating drill rigs. Its unique ap-
plication to the cutterhead dredge can be seen in this artist's con-
ception. Note that the hull is more or less conventional, but the
ladder and attendant forward frames are novel. The ladder is ar-
ticulated with the conventional trunnions at the hull, but with two
additional trunnions just ahead of the cutter module. The need for
two additional trunnions is clear from model tests which indicated
that only one additional trunnion would allow destruction of the
mechanism when the cutter and hull trunnion were in a straight
line with the additional trunnion.
To understand the compensating principle, assume the weight
of the cutter module is 100,000 pounds and that all of this weight
is carried by the hydraulic cylinders and the soil reaction. Now
110 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

assume that the soil requires 50,000 pounds cutting force leaving
50,000 pounds for the cylinders, easily adjustable by the operator.
As the dredge rises on a swell, the cylinders will lift only 50,000
pounds; this causes the cylinder rods to extend, in order for the
soil resistance to supply the other 50,000 pounds. As the dredge
falls the rods will retract, reversing the procedure. The cutter re-
mains in constant contact with the bottom, assuring high dredge
efficiency, while the entire ladder is protected against the heave,
roll, and surge of the hull.

SUMMARY
The type of hydraulic dredge selected for a project is a function of
the project condition and requirements. If the operation is primar-
ily a sand winning operation to provide fill, and contour of the
bottom is unimportant, the plain suction dredge may apply. If the
estuary to be dredged has a specified channel and heavy marine
traffic, the hopper dredge may be applicable. Large, loose shoals
can be efficiently removed by dustpan dredges. Under any of the
above conditions, the versatile cutterhead dredge may prove to be
the advantageous selection.
This page intentionally left blank
The cutter.
 Chapter 13

THE CUTTER

TYPES AND FUNCTIONS

The cutter of the cutterhead dredge is the excavator which sur-
rounds the suction intake. It has two primary functions: (1) to
loosen and disintegrate the bottom material into particle sizes com-
patible with the pumping system; and (2) to place the disintegrated
material in the high velocity stream at the suction intake in the
necessary quantity.
Most cutterhead dredges use the traditional basket cutter in
one or more of its variations; however, there are three other types
of cutters that have achieved some popularity. They are the bucket
wheel, the endless chain, and the high-speed disk.

THE BASKET CUTTER

This traditional cutter is a multibladed excavator which rotates
around a longitudinally mounted shaft. Figs. 13-1 and 13-2 show it
in its simplest, single-piece casting form, as well as in complicated
fabrications involving replaceable edges and hardened, pinned-on
teeth. The basket cutter can vary in shape, hand, number of blades,
type of cutting edge, method of attachment, rake angle, etc., and
since there is little hard engineering data available to the industry
regarding the effect of the various designs, there is a wide diver-
gence of opinion in the industry as to their value.
The spider cutter is a popular variation of the basket (see Fig.
13-3). The true basket curves the crown end of each blade back
into the drive hub for support. The spider terminates the blades in
space, achieving support by extending short arms from the hub to
an intermediate section of the blade.
114 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 13-1. Plain basket cutters. A: Single casting, 6 blades; B: Bolted edges, 7
blades; C: Fabricated, welded edges, 8 blades. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine
Corporation.

Fig. 13-2. Toothed basket cutters. A: Welded serrated

edges, 6 blades. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley, Inc. B: Crude
welded teeth, 6 blades. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Cor-
poration. C: Crude pinned teeth, 6 blades. Courtesy: El-
licott Machine Corporation. D: Pinned teeth, welded bi-
leg adaptor. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley, Inc. E: Pinned
teeth, round base adaptor. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley, Inc.
F: Pinned teeth, renewable edge. Courtesy: Mobile Pul-
ley, Inc. G: Pinned teeth, renewable edge. Courtesy: El-
licott Machine Corporation.
THE CUTTER 115

Fig. 13-3. Spider cutters. A: With renewable blades. B: With renewable blades with
trash bars. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corporation.

On granular, free-flowing material, almost any moderately

sturdy basket design is successful. As long as the cutter runs in-
terference for the suction inlet, i.e., prevents excessive stresses on
the suction by displacing the material and bringing it inside the
cutter within the influence of the high velocity stream of water, it
will perform. It should be emphasized that "within the influence"
means the suction inlet should be essentially in contact with the
material or even buried. Note the illustration in Fig. 13-4 which
shows a pipe representing a suction inlet. At the vertical plane of
the inlet, the pipe area is irR2. If the pipe is 24 inches, the limiting
velocity curve, Fig. 4-1, shows that 16 ft/sec velocity is required for

THE CUTTER

Fig. 13-4. Suction inlet—distance effect.

116 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

optimum transport of coarse sand through the suction area. How-

ever, if the center of the inlet is one radius away from the material,
the area of the hemisphere is 2irR2, and the velocity only 8 ft/sec
at the nearest material, which results in a negligible pickup of
solids.
Most problems with cutters are encountered with materials
which must be disintegrated or sized so as to be compatible with
the transport system. The material may be dense or tenacious, ne-
cessitating high force and/or edge velocity to perform the excava-
tion. If the cutter proves adequate for this first function, excava-
tion, it may yet fail in the second, i.e., bringing material into the
proximity of the suction inlet. Cutters with the speed to mill away
hard material may scatter the resulting particles over the bottom
and achieve very low production. The author observed an opera-
tion where a specially developed cutter disintegrated limestone by
massive application of power and milling action but, even when
overdigging by 12 feet, was unable to ingest a profitable payload
since it effectively dispelled most material it contacted. After the
bottom was pulverized to a 12-foot depth, a reduction in RPM and
swing speed of the massive rock cutter might well have increased
production. Or, a change to a more open, acquisitive cutter could
have been effective. Again, the suction inlet must be in close prox-
imity to, or preferably buried in, the material to carry a good load,
particularly with heavy, coarse materials. It is the author's consid-
ered opinion that basket cutters fail as frequently in the second
function, i.e., putting material in proximity to the suction inlet, as
they do in the first function, excavation.
A few years ago, a well-known processor of heavy minerals was
failing to achieve desired dredge capacity when encountering hard-
pan. Capacity would drop by 25 to 35 percent when hardpan was
encountered, and the opinion was unanimous that the basket cutter
horsepower was inadequate. New cutters were tried, but to no
avail, and the possibility of a msgor change including a complete
cutter, motor, and line shaft was under consideration. The author
was called in for consultation and noted the velocity in the suction
pipe was borderline on the granular sand normally pumped, and
recognized that the hardpan, in larger fragments, required a higher
velocity. An increase in velocity resulted in regaining the lost ca-
pacity, and the cutter problem was solved. Cutter problems should
always be considered in context with the hydraulic transport con-
THE CUTTER 117

ditions that prevail since the successful disintegration of the bot-

tom by itself, puts no material on the bank.
Fig. 13-5 shows an artist's idealistic version of a basket cutter
in operation. The solid in this drawing is showing amazing coop-
eration by rushing to the suction inlet for no apparent reason.
While the cutter blades are designed to afford some transportation
of the material toward the inlet, this is achieved only when the
cutter is full. And, a full cutter is achieved only when the cutter is
essentially buried in material. A significant shortcoming of the bas-
ket cutter is that the trailing half of the cutter is wide open, allow-
ing the excavated material to fall out. Therefore, the basket cutter
is capable of picking up perhaps half of the material that it exca-
vates and is not an efficient device. See Fig. 13-6.

Cutter Shape
Fig. 13-7 shows the face angle and cone angle of the basket cutter.12
When the face angle is zero and the cone angle zero, the cutter is

Fig. 13-5. Basket cutter, idealized operation. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine

Corporation.
118 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 13-6. Basket cutter showing retention problem.

Fig. 13-7. Cutter face and cone angles. Courtesy: World Dredging Conference.
THE CUTTER 119

said to be "square" or apple shaped. Optimally, the face angle

should vary as a function of the angle of attack of the cutter to the
bottom, or more simply stated, as a function of the cutter shaft
angle to the bottom. When the cutter shaft angle is small, a large
face angle, creating a highly conical cutter, can bring the back ring
of the cutter into contact with the bottom. This is not necessarily
bad, since the suction inlet is at the back ring, but the stationary
ladder structure is immediately adyacent to the back ring, and this
condition can lead to "dragging the ladder" or pulling stationary
surfaces through the bottom. This causes high line pull, broken
swing wires, and low production. A square cutter is more appro-
priate for shallow digging (low shaft angle), whereas a high face
angle (perhaps 20° to 30°) is more effective for deep digging (high
shaft angle). Ideally, the cutter should cut a finished grade approx-
imately parallel to the water surface.
Displacement Angle
Fig. 13-8 shows the angle of displacement of a single blade. A
greater angle of displacement makes for a smoother operation and

Fig. 13-8. Cutter blade displacement angle. Courtesy: World Dredging Conference.
120 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

greater penetrating force. A large displacement angle is particularly

important when the traditional six blades are reduced to five or
four.
Some cutters have been built with seven or eight blades in an
attempt to retain the excavated material in the proximity of the
intake. The author was involved in the development of an 8-blade
design, Fig. 13-8, which was intended to increase the percent solids
going to the pump. It ran smoothly but worked little better than
the 5-blade spider it replaced, and once again it was found that the
problem was too low a suction velocity. It was during this effort
that the idea of the Dredge Laws was conceived as a way of ex-
plaining the various dredging phenomena.

Rake Angle
One of the more important design elements of the basket cutter is
the rake angle, Fig. 13-9. If the angle is too low, inadequate material
will be excavated and production will be low. If the angle is too
high, excessive horsepower will be utilized and material rejected.
A practical range is 25° to 30°.

Fig. 13-9. Cutter rake angle. Courtesy: World Dredging Conference.

THE CUTTER 121

Outside Diameter/Length Ratio

An important ratio is cutter outside diameter to length. A proven
reasonable figure is 0.67. If the ratio is as high as 1.0, the crown,
where much digging occurs, is at such a distance from the suction
inlet as to diminish the transport efficiency.

Peripheral Speed
Little or no laboratory data is available on the correct cutting edge
speed for various materials since virgin material cannot be trans-
ferred to the laboratory. The conventional wisdom and experience
recognizes that a variable speed drive is desirable in order to optimize
speed for varying materials. For granular, freeflowing materials, al-
most any speed succeeds. For hard coral or limestone, a high-speed
milling action is recommended, coupled with pinned, hardened teeth.
For clay, moderate to high speeds as a function of the clay's consis-
tency is recommended, with either a plain or serrated edge, or the
pinned tooth cutter. On blasted rock, a slow speed is dictated to avoid
repelling the particles. With the variable speed, the operator can ex-
periment on various materials to optimize his cutter operation.
Most cutters have a maximum peripheral speed vaiying between
300 and 600 feet per minute. The speed variation should be capable
of at least a 50 percent reduction, normally with constant torque, and
preferably, but not essentially, a smooth, stepless reduction. If the
drive is an alternating electric current, it will probably have a stepped
reduction, which limits its flexibility, but does not disqualify the drive.
For hard materials, a top speed of 600 feet per minute maximum is
recommended; for softer, more normal material, a top speed of 400
feet per minute, with both having speed reduction capability to per-
haps 200 feet per minute in order to minimize wear, power, and dis-
persion of bottom materials when the higher speed is unneeded.

Horsepower vs. Torque vs. Cutting Force

Cutter horsepower can be misleading when quoted as a simple
number. On most bottom materials, torque or cutting force is the
key to successful excavation, not horsepower alone.

Torque = cutting force X cutter radius

122 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

For a given 3-foot outside diameter cutter, assume there is a choice

between two 100-horsepower drives, one with a full-load speed of
50 RPM, and the other 25 RPM. The 50 RPM unit would very likel
be cheaper and thus attractive to the buyer, but does it have the
same capability as the 25 RPM unit?
In Equation 13-1 above, drop the constant and rearrange to:

Equation 13-2 rearranges to:

Therefore, it can be seen that the 50 RPM drive provides only one
half the torque and cutting force of the 25 RPM unit.
Cutting force alone is much more indicative of cutter capability
than horsepower, but needs to be taken one more step to be de-
finitive. Total cutting force would be sufficiently definitive if all
cutters were the same size and geometry, but they are not. There-
fore, if one cutter were twice as long as the other, but had the
same total cutting force, its force per linear inch of cutter length
(pounds/inch) would be only one half as high as the shorter cutter.
The operator needs to know pounds/inch of cutter length for a true
comparison of cutter options. Successful cutters have varied from
250 pounds/inch to over 2,500 pounds/inch. The requirement is, of
course, a function of the material to be dug.

Cutter Drives
The cutter has drive options similar to those of the submerged
pump. Variable speed electric drives are impractical to submerge,
because of the need to dissipate their heat of inefficiency. There-
THE CUTTER 123

fore, it is necessary that they use a line shaft. Electrical drives have
an advantage over hydraulic in that before stalling, their pullout
torque rises dramatically, providing a brief but significant increase
in cutting force.
The submerged hydraulic drive has many advantages. It is, un-
doubtedly, the lowest cost variable speed drive and is relatively
simple to submerge. Its speed is easy to change by a simple ad-
justment to the hydraulic supply pump piston travel. Its torque
potential is a constant regardless of speed, providing on demand a
constant cutting force which allows a constant relationship to the
swing winch line pull. Both electrical and hydraulic cutter drives
have their advocates, but hydraulic drives continue to gain on their
electrical counterparts in new designs.
Horsepower Requirements
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of cutter drives is their
horsepower requirement. One chief executive officer of a mayor
dredging company was heard to remark that there was never a
cutter with sufficient horsepower. From the viewpoint of being able
to overcome any obstacle and afford the maximum feed to the
pump at all times, this sounds like a reasonable statement. How-
ever, it is somewhat equivalent to stating that there was never an
automobile with sufficient horsepower. It is entirely possible that
in a tight passing situation, one might wish he had twice the horse-
power on even the most powerful automobile, but the cost of such
power would be prohibitive. The same is true of the cutter horse-
power on a dredge because the cutting force affects the winches,
the spuds, the ladder, and even the hull size. Since the dredge is
an economic tool, it is not reasonable to pay a great deal of money
for a powerful drive whose full capacity is utilized 1 percent of the
time while the cost of its size inefficiency continues unabated 100
percent of the time.
The operator can arrive at a reasonable and economic horse-
power for the cutter by working with the peripheral speed of 400
to 600 feet per minute and a unit cutting force of 250 to 2,500
pounds/inch, varying as a function of the material to be dug. In the
author's experience, only extraordinary conditions justify exceed-
ing the 2,500 pounds/inch figure.
Velocity and unit cutting force are, of course, a function of
cutter outside diameter. A reasonable ratio of cutter outside di-
124 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

ameter to suction line inside diameter is 3:1. While this ratio can
vary, 3:1 is economical and allows for the reasonable arrangement
of a "clown's mouth" suction inlet.

Cutter Calculations
Having determined the size of the suction line from the capacity
requirements in Chapter 11, the cutter size and horsepower can be
calculated from the following ratios using the above information.
Assume an 18-inch suction and a 3:1 ratio of cutter diameter
to suction diameter, then:

Cutter diameter = 3 X 18 = 54 inches

With cutter length equalling 0.67 of its diameter:

Cutter length = 0.67 X 54 = 36 inches

To calculate the mean diameter of the cutter, assume a 15° face

angle:

Tan 15° = .268 X 36 = 9.6 inches

Diameter at crown = 54 inches - 2(9.6) = 35
(Say, 36 inches)
Mean diameter of cutter =

Assume 500 pounds/inch unit cutting force:

Total cutting force = 500 X 36 = 18,000 pounds

For hard materials, assume 600 feet/minute peripheral speed, and

a pinned tooth cutter:
THE CUTTER 125

For softer, more normal materials, use 400 feet/minute peripheral

speed and a plain, serrated, or pinned tooth cutter.

The latter speed and horsepower are more normal for the industry
which is not accustomed to thinking in terms of rock being cut by
a moderately sized dredge. In many cases, it is more appropriate
to blast, but coral, soft limestone, or incipient rock have been dug
with no more power than that calculated above for hard materials.
The economics of rock dredging are chancy, and should be con-
sidered carefully for each project.
The practical operator will recognize that the dimensions ar-
rived at by the above procedure are approximate, and that he
should avail himself of economies offered by available standard
cutters and drive components which approximate his calculations.

Cutter Capacity
The cutter functions as an excavator and feeder of the solids to
the hydraulic transport system. If the cutter is unable to feed the
system at the calculated transport rate, the dredge capacity must
be down-rated.
Cutter capability varies broadly between dredges. Even where
two cutters have the same HP, the cutting force of one can be twice
that of the other. To compare cutters, it is necessary to reduce the
analysis to the lowest common denominator, i.e., cutting force ex-
pressed in pounds/linear inch of projected blade length. Then, by
plotting the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow count (the
dredge industry's traditional indication of cutting difficulty) against
the cutting force in pounds/linear inch, and against observed em-
pirical production rate in cubic yards per hour, we can supply the
estimator with a guide for predicting cutter limitations on the pro-
duction of a dredge.
The dredge cutter capacity chart is shown as Fig. 13-10. Note
the abscissa between 10 and 100 is the SPT blow count, and the
ordinate is cu yd/hr, plotted against various cutting forces ranging
from 250-3,000 pounds/linear inch. Using the chart requires no
126 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

multiplier; rather, if the cu yd/hr of the cutter equals or exceeds

the hydraulic transport capability of the dredge, no adjustment is
required. If the cutter capability is less, then the dredge capability
becomes that of the cutter.
As examples of the use of the cutter plot, note that the capacity
of a 10-foot diameter, 250 pound/linear inch cutter on 60 blow
count materials is (10)2 X 1.05 = 105 cu yd/hr; a 500 pound/linear
inch cutter would achieve (10)2 X 8 = 800 cu yd/hr; and a 1,000
pound/linear inch cutter would excavate (10)2 X 100 = 10,000 cu
yd/hr.
It is commonly acknowledged in the industry that there is an
advantage of electrical cutter drives over hydraulic drives. This
advantage is derived from the "pull-out" or stalling torque char-
acteristics of the electric motor. As the resistance of the soil in-
creases beyond the cutter drive's full load torque, the drive slows
down, increasing the amperage and torque substantially before
stalling. The stalling torque may be 4-6 times the full load torque,
so this temporary torque (obviously it cannot be maintained for a
protracted period) adds an estimated 50 percent more effective
cutting force than is available with hydraulic power. The HP for-
mulas, which reflect the lower electrical HP requirement for a
given cutter service, are shown below.
The HP required for the 1,000 pound/linear inch cutter at 20 RPM
where F equals cutting force in pounds/linear inch would be:

The cutter chart is included with the caveat that the data is the
best currently available, but is not sufficient to constitute proof of
the widely extrapolated curves as shown. There are many short-
comings of the somewhat crude SPT procedure, one of which is
its lack of linearity. At times it can make a firmly packed, low
porosity sand give the impression of incipient rock; upon excava-
tion, however, such sand disintegrates readily and transports freely
if not cemented.
Many geotechnical engineers consider the SPT of dubious value
above 100 blow count. The dredgeman needful of the maximum
available soil data will extrapolate "refusal" blow count of 75 blows
for 3" penetration to an SPT result of 300. These results are non-
THE CUTTER 127

linear and questionable, but in the mind of the dredgeman, they

are better than blind guesses. There is general agreement that
above 100 blow count, a different method of testing is required.
One promising test method sometimes used is the unconfined
compressive strength test (UCST). This test is inappropriate for
non-cohesive or non-cemented materials since an undisturbed sam-
ple cannot be obtained for testing. It is likely that the SPT gives
better results on soils with less than 100 blow count, whereas the
UCST gives better results on cemented material above 100; modern
dredges with powerful cutters have dug lenses of rock with com-
pressive strengths as high as 15,000-20,000 psi. The cutter chart
attached has been developed using field data and could prove help-
ful to the dredge estimator, but should be used with caution.
A clear correlation between SPT and UCST in the range of 10-
300 SPT is not clearly established; however the chart allows the
use of either SPT or UCST data, as available.
It is possible that a combination of the SPT and UCST will
become standard on future projects. Most projects have used the
SPT only, necessitating the characterization of some areas as "re-
fusal." This leaves such areas undefined, and the soil data
incomplete.
It may prove possible in the future to develop one test for the
entire range of soil, such as unconfined shear strength. This may
more closely approximate the action of the cutter and give better
results. This is an area of research that sorely needs the attention
of the dredging industry.

Materials of Construction
It is impractical to harden a one-piece cast steel cutter to a high
Brinnell value for better wear since it would fail in shock. Likewise,
there is a limit to the hardness and carbon content of cutting edges
welded to the softer base blade since the weld would fail if the
material were too hard. An advantageous arrangement is the
pinned tooth cutter. Here, the teeth which carry the brunt of the
excavation can be 350 to 500 Brinnell, while the base blade can be
a casting of perhaps 150 Brinnell. A further modification can pro-
vide a replaceable cutting edge, possibly 250 Brinnell, which is tack
welded to the base blade. The edge can be plain, serrated, or
equipped with adaptors to receive the pinned teeth, providing a
128 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 13-10. Cutter capacity vs. SPT and UCST.

highly versatile unit. This relatively new configuration is recom-

mended for consideration as a general-purpose cutter. Figs. 13-2
(f) and (g) are examples.

Particle Passage
Surprisingly little coordination between the cutter and the dredge
pump regarding particle passage seems to have been attempted in
the industry. With the cost in downtime involved in removing over-
sized particles from the stone box, it would seem some coordina-
tion would be justified, but most operators have settled for trash
bars welded into the cutter. See Fig. 13-3B. Such trash bars can
severely limit the intake of some materials and reduce production;
however, if the opening in the cutter would limit the particle size
to that which would pass the pump without limiting intake of
smaller particles, it would be a boon to the operator. Frequently
the sources of the cutter and pump are different manufacturers,
and coordination is achieved only by the operator.

THE BUCKET WHEEL

The bucket wheel excavator is a rotating wheel of bottomless
buckets mounted on a lateral shaft as shown in Fig. 13-11. The
THE CUTTER 129

Fig. 13-11. Rennison Goldfield's 1,340 HP bucketwheel. Courtesy: IHC.

material enters an inner chamber in slurry form, and proceeds to

the dredge pump via the suction line.
The bucket wheel was introduced to the dredging industry in
the 1970s by an American manufacturer, and since then, has been
followed by European and Australian manufacturers. It has nu-
merous advantages which seem to assure it a permanent role in
the industry, but it has disadvantages which also assure the role of
competitive type cutters.
130 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

The conventional basket cutter is, in the vast majority of cases,

sold as a separate component. The more complex bucket wheel
excavation is normally sold as a complete excavating module, in-
cluding structure and drive, and the range of size and horsepower
offered is more limited than for the basket. No effort will be made
in this text to delineate the design aspects of the bucket wheel as
was done with the basket shape since it is strongly recommended
that only proven proprietary designs of this relatively new exca-
vator be utilized.
Because the excavating element of the bucket wheel is the rel-
atively short length of the bucket projection, each advance of the
dredge is much shorter than for the basket cutter. Therefore, the
conventional walking spud mechanism is not satisfactory for the
bucket wheel since the spud diameter may be equal to the advance,
and the spud would fall back in the old bottom hole. The bucket
wheel must have a spud carriage arrangement, explained in Chap-
ter 17.

Advantages
The bucket wheel type addresses many of the shortcomings of the
basket cutter. The advantages and disadvantages of the bucket
wheel over the basket cutter are summarized below.

Fig. 13.12. Endless chain cutter. Courtesy: Eagle Iron Works.

THE CUTTER 131

(1) Since the bucket wheel cuts on the leading side of the
bucket when swinging, it has bidirectional excavation facility.
Note that the basket cutter digs difficult material effectively only
in the undercutting direction. See Fig. 13-6. On the return or over-
cutting swing, the basket, on firm material, has less capacity, or
may be unable to-dig at all. The basket cutter also has a tendency
to travel or "run away" on the blade edges as the basket rotates.
This action can cut the swing wire if it is overtaken, resulting in
considerable expense and lost time.
(2) Since the bucket wheel concentrates its horsepower on a
smaller length than the basket, a given horsepower can provide as
much as three times the unit cutting force of the basket.
(3) The bucket wheel has a positive acquisition attribute in
that it not only force-feeds the material into the suction flow, it
also prevents the material from escaping. Unlike the basket cutter
which drops material out of its trailing half, sending to the suction
pipe only that material which comes under the influence of the
high velocity water, the bucket wheel is a more efficient and pre-
cise tool.
(4) With its positive acquisition attribute, the bucket wheel can
handle heavy mineral acquisitions. The basket cutter has never
succeeded in the placer mining of gold since it excavates much
more material than is transported and the lighter elements tend to
rise to the suction inlet and the heavier components tend to drop
out to be left behind, enriching the bottom. The bucket wheel could
prove to be a successful placer tool, and a viable successor to the
expensive bucket ladder dredge.
(5) In the mining of phosphates or other alluvial deposits, the
bucket wheel has the advantage of better depth control in that it
does not react to the solid as a function of digging direction. The
basket cutter has a tendency to change digging depth with swing
direction. In the undercutting direction, the depth is greater; in the
overcutting direction, the depth is less. Furthermore, the bucket
approach to the bottom remains at the same efficient angle,
whereas the basket loses efficiency as it stands on its nose at
greater depths.
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of the bucket wheel relate primarily to cost. Not
only is the wheel more expensive than the basket, but the required
132 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

adjunct of the sliding spud carriage is considerably more expensive

than the walking spud arrangement. However, the extra cost of the
spud carriage is generally offset by increased dredge efficiency, and
many European dredges have installed the spud carriage with bas-
ket cutters for the greater facility.

THE ENDLESS CHAIN

The Swintek dredge as shown on Fig. 13-12 is essentially a plain
suction dredge which utilizes an endless conveyor chain to scarify
the bottom and keep the plain suction clear by transporting over-
sized particles away from the digging area. It has had broad and
successful application in noncohesive deposits of sand and gravel,
but lacks the versatility of the basket or bucket wheel in cohesive
deposits.
The endless chain, at first glance, may not appear to justify the
term cutter. But, because it runs interference for the suction intake,
places the intake in close proximity to the material, disintegrates
the material to a degree (plus removing oversized particles), the

Fig. 13-13. High speed disc cutter composite.

THE CUTTER 133

endless chain performs the functions of a cutter and deserves the

title.

THE HIGH SPEED DISC CUTTER

One of the most serious problems of the basket cutter is its inabil-
ity to deal with tenacious, fibrous vegetation. The peripheral speed
of the basket is relatively slow, and there is no opposing anvil to
allow the shearing of cellulosic materials which tend to obstruct
the flow of soil to the suction inlet. Many a dredging project has
suffered production penalties and financial losses because of an
inability to deal with vegetation. The disc cutter, equipped with an
anvil, shows much success in dealing with vegetation. Without the
anvil, it has been successful in sand, clay, and incipient rock.
The disc cutter is patterned after the wood chipper of the paper
industry. See Fig. 13-13. It has replaceable knives, protruding from
a flat, round disc, which cut the material and force-feed the parti-
cles through apertures in the disc where the knives are attached.
The stationary chamber on the backside of the disc connects to
the suction pipe going to the dredge pump.

Fig. 13-14. 600 HP dual bucketwheel excavator. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.
134 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 13-15. Cutter module with cutter removed to show suction mouth. Courtesy:
Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.

The cutter head is mounted on a pivot, so that the head can

be placed in a vertical position facing the direction of swing. This
cutter, like the bucket wheel, requires a spud carriage to provide
the precision necessary to properly position the cutter.
Beside dealing successfully with vegetation, the disc uses its
speed and inertia to excavate the bottom material. It requires little
force to hold it into the cut, since the knives tend to feed the disc
into the material. Therefore this type of cutter has been successful
in eliminating anchors, winches, and swing wires in favor of swing
cylinders (hydraulic) at the stern, mounted on a trailing spud barge,
and has significant advantages in shallow areas where anchors are
difficult to place.
The main disadvantage of the disc cutter relates to mainte-
nance of the knives which dull quickly on sand, but need to be
sharp for vegetation. The knives work surprisingly well on clay,
particulating the material for easy transport. The cost of downtime
for, and maintenance of, the disc cutter per cubic yard of material
will normally run higher than for the basket, particularly when a
mixture of vegetation and abrasive materials are encountered.
THE CUTTER 135

SUMMARY
Each of the four types of cutters for the pipeline dredge has its
advantages and disadvantages. While the basket is still the preva-
lent cutter, it is recommended that the operator consider each type
cutter for every project, in order to make a conscious decision
based on the merits of the cutter and its compatibility with the job
conditions.
Exploded view of semi-lined pump. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.
 Chapter 14

THE DREDGE PUMP

At the heart of the dredging operation is the centrifugal dredge

pump. The centrifugal pump is one of mankind's most useful dis-
coveries; yet it is so commonplace, it is seldom acknowledged as
the wondrous machine it is. Consider the following dredge pump
characteristics:
1. It induces fluid velocities greater than the speed of its fastest mov-
ing component.
2. It creates a vacuum capable of evacuating 90 percent of the at-
mospheric pressure.
3. It creates discharge pressures between 200 and 300 feet of head.
4. It passes copious quantities of fluid, plus entrained solids.
5. It is surprisingly tolerant of poor design and application, even
pumping (poorly) when run backwards.
6. Its overall performance is quite predictable, even though its inter-
nal flow pattern is so complex and variable that its details may
never be known.
7. It accomplishes all of the above at efficiencies that are the envy
of most other machines.
When the dredge pump is efficiently and consistently pumping
a good load of solids to the designated disposal area, the operator
can be assured he is meeting his economic objectives. The discus-
sion in previous chapters has indicated the effect of project param-
eters (line size, length, digging depth, etc.) on the performance of
well-designed pumps. Unfortunately, all pumps are not well de-
signed. One analyst5 pointed out that there is a wide and at times
disqualifying disparity in the performance of commercially avail-
able dredge pumps. The purpose of this chapter is not to detail the
mechanical design of the dredge pump, but to provide guidelines
to aid the operator in selecting and operating the dredge pump.
138 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

PUMP TYPE
The dredge pump should be a single suction, single stage, centrif-
ugal unit with a closed impeller and volute casing. Fig. 14-1 shows
an obsolete dredge pump which was designated by its manufac-
turer as "medium-duty." It differs in some respects from the design
of other manufacturers, and is used to provide points of reference
for discussion of various dredge pump features.

PARTICLE CLEARANCE
The dredge pump must handle unclassified solid particles of in-
determinate size. Regardless of the size designed to pass through
it, the pump will eventually encounter a particle which will lodge

1 Shell or Case 18 Radial Bearing 31D Coupling Pins

2 Impeller Cap 3 IE Coupling Key-
3 Shaft 19 Lantern Ring Pump
4 Shaft Sleeve 20 Bolts 3 IF Coupling Key-
5 Shaft Nut 21 Gland Studs Motor
6 Suction Head 22 Cap Screws 32 Ball
7 Suction Head Liner 23 Liner Studs Bearing
8 Suction Throat Ring 24 Sealing Washers 32A Housing
9 Impeller Nose Ring 26 Throat Ring Studs 32B Retainer
9A Impeller Nose Ring 27 Sealing Washers 32C Slinger
Screws 28 Jack Screw 32D Slinger
11 Gland 29 Foundation Screw 32E Adjusting Nut
12 Stuffing Box 30 Impeller Key 33 Thrust Ball
13 Back Head 31A Coupling Hub- Bearing
14 Back Head Liner Motor Half 33A Housing
15 Bearing Frame 3 IB Coupling Hub- 33B Retainer
16 Adjusting Bolt Pump Half 33C Slinger
17 Thrust Bearing 3 1C Coupling Pin 33D Slinger
Cap Bushings 33E Adjusting Nut
36 Sub-base

Fig. 14-1 Medium duty dredge pump, now obsolete.

THE DREDGE PUMP 139

in the suction stone box located immediately ahead of the pump. It

is imperative to the economics of the dredge operation that the larg-
est practical particle size be able to pass through the pump so as to
minimize the downtime required for cleaning the stone box. This par-
ticle size should be a sphere with its diameter the same dimension
as the width between the shrouds of the impeller, or a minimum of
60 percent of the discharge diameter of the pump. For example, if
the pump has a 20-inch discharge, the width between the shrouds
should be a minimum of 12 inches, and the pump impeller vanes
should be so arranged as to allow a 12-inch sphere to pass.
Obviously, many pumps do not meet this criterion and, on clean
sand, are still able to function satisfactorily. However, this clear-
ance is of paramount importance to the success of a dredge on
unclassified material, and the dredges which have foundered on
projects with trashy material can bear witness to this fact.
Dredge pump manufacturers, to their credit, have attempted to
improve the efficiency of their product by experimenting with the
width of the impeller. Some improvement has been noted by nar-
rowing the impeller to more closely emulate the water pump de-
sign. Dredge pumps are tested on water, but they are manufactured
to pump water with entrained solids', therefore, the operator must
exercise care to use narrow impellers only where oversized parti-
cles will not be encountered. Further, he should recognize that the
small improvement in efficiency afforded by the narrow impeller
is diminished (and perhaps reversed) by an economic, high SG
slurry of small particle solids. See Fig. 1-7 regarding the effect of
SG and particle size on Che.

FULLY LINED VS. PARTIALLY LINED PUMP

A fully lined pump has the entire inside of the pump enclosure
lined with abrasion resisting material. Fig. 14-1 shows a pump that
is only partially lined. While it does have a suction throat ring, item
8, it does not have a lining for the full suction throat, which in this
case is cast integrally with the front head, item 6. After the abrasive
slurry wears out the throat, it is necessary to replace the entire
front head with its expensive machining and multiple bolt holes.
The front and back heads should not be wearing parts, and in this
instance the back head, item 13, is protected by the back head
Fig. 14-2. Exploded view of fully lined pump.
THE DREDGE PUMP 141

liner, item 14. Although the stuffing box housing, item 12, is vul-
nerable, it could be protected by modifying the design to allow the
back head liner, item 14, to extend past the stuffing box.
Most dredge pumps today have full throat liners and front and
back head liners. A small minority have shell or casing liners as well.
Shell liners increase the size, complexity, and cost of a pump to such
an extent that they are seldom used. There are strong advocates for
shell liners, however, and there is logic on their side. The author
would recommend starting with a pump lined completely except for
the shell, and letting experience dictate the future course.

IMPELLER
As the pump is the heart of the dredge operation, so the impeller
is the heart of the pump itself. The head, capacity, and efficiency
of a pump can be radically altered by changing nothing other than
the impeller. The author was able to save a dredge pump and a
$100,000 drive for a client by replacing a 4-vane impeller with a
more effective 3-vane unit that increased significantly its head, ca-
pacity, and efficiency. This not only increased production by 40
percent, but the larger particle clearance essentially eliminated the
downtime of the pump for cleaning out trash. In this extremely
trashy operation, the client had been forced to operate for decades
with a large disintegrator (root hog) in the suction line. After the
3-vane impeller was installed, the root hog was scrapped.
Item 2 in Fig. 14-1 is the impeller. It has a curved entrance,
which increases its cost, as well as the complexity of its adjacent
parts, such as the throat ring, item 9. While there are many who
favor this curved entrance, the best performing dredge pumps, with
which the author is familiar, have a perfectly straight suction
shroud. It is debatable that the increased cost and complexity of
the curved entrance is justifiable.
Note also that the front shroud of the impeller in Fig. 14-1 has
a larger diameter than the back shroud. This minimizes thrust by
minimizing the back shroud area. Sometimes the diameter of the
shroud is sized to minimize wear of the adjacent part which is
accentuated at its outer diameter. The turbulence and wear at the
discharge of the impeller into the casing are best taken by the
component part which is longer wearing and easier to replace.
142 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Note that on both shrouds in Fig. 14-1, the wear will be on the
expensive casing. If the front shroud had been decreased to the
diameter of the back shroud, the wear would have been on the
front head liner, item 7, generally a hard, longer wearing material
than the casing. Even though they are of the same material, it
would still be economical to take the wear on the small, simple,
less expensive head liner.
Impellers should always be of the closed type, i.e., have front
and back shrouds. The strength afforded to the vanes by the
shrouds is essential when the brutal forces of boulders and stumps
are encountered.
The impeller illustrated in Fig. 14-1 is keyed to the tapered pump
shaft and held in position by a nut on the reduced, threaded end of
the shaft. A more common design is to thread the impeller hub and
mount it on the male thread of essentially the full diameter shaft
against a collar. This latter design facilitates removal by blocking the
impeller and rotating the shaft. It also allows the inner hub of the
impeller which is exposed to the slurry to be smoothly cast of the
impeller material, with no necessity for removing a worn nut.

STUFFING BOX
The stuffing box, item 12, should be replaceable without the ne-
cessity for replacing the back head. It should be equipped with at
least four rings of packing and a lantern ring for admitting water
for cooling and lubrication.
Although it is not yet common, one manufacturer has mounted
the stuffing box to the back head through heavy, yielding rubber.
This has resulted in an extraordinary long life for the packing, since
the nemesis of packing is cavitational vibration which pounds it
out. The rubber allows the stuffing box to float with the shaft,
greatly reducing the stresses on the packing. Many Europeans have
replaced packing with seals successfully, but the simple, packing
gland is still prevalent in the United States.

SHAFT AND BEARINGS

The shaft should be generously designed to withstand the buffeting
of heavy dredge service. It should be protected in the stuffing box
area by a nonrusting, replaceable wear sleeve.
THE DREDGE PUMP 143

The bearings should be adequately spaced and sized to accom-

modate the overhung load of the impeller. The bearing adjacent to
the stuffing box normally carries a radial load only. This bearing
should be carefully sealed and protected by water slingers to pre-
vent water entry from the stuffing box. The other, or outboard,
bearing normally carries not only a radial load but the thrust load
as well. Frequently a separate antifriction thrust bearing is placed
alongside the radial bearing within the common housing. On large
pumps, it is not uncommon to use flat bearings with thrust shoes,
but the average designer uses this excellent Kingsbury or Union
type bearing only when mandatory, because of the high cost.

ADJUSTABLE MOUNTING
Fig. 14-1 shows an excellent cast, machined pump base, with an
adjusting screw, item 16, to position the impeller properly within
the casing upon assembly, and after wear. This adjustment moves
the entire shaft and bearings, requiring some tolerance in the drive
coupling, item 31. Not all pumps have this adjustment, some using
washers to position the impeller against a shaft collar. The use of
washers makes adjustment difficult, and allows volumetric effi-
ciency of the pump to deteriorate as slurry passes between the
face of the suction shroud and the front head liner from the high
pressure volute to the low pressure suction eye. This passage must
be minimized because the higher the flow, the greater the wear,
and the lower the pump efficiency. The adjustable mounting feature
is a valuable adjunct to the maintenance of a dredge pump, but
unfortunately is often not used in actual practice even when
supplied.
An alternate method of minimizing recirculation, preferred by
some operators, is to have an adjustable throat piece. As wear
occurs on the impeller shroud or on the throat piece itself, the
throat piece is jacked toward the impeller to reclose the gap. This
does not require the loosening of the bearing house bolts, and runs
no danger of shaft misalignment.

WIPER VANES
Wiper vanes, sometimes called external or expeller vanes, are lo-
cated on the outer surfaces of the impeller shrouds for the purpose
144 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

of precluding or expelling material from the area between the im-

peller and the head liners. They are not universally used, but in the
author's experience, they are justified and recommended. Some
plain shroud impellers (without wiper vanes) have reportedly
lugged down and even stalled small pumps by the braking action
of material between the stationary liner and the rotating shroud.
While large pumps with their more powerful drives are not so apt
to stall, logic would indicate that the absence of wiper vanes re-
sults in losses and wear which are costly to the operator.
The history of the development of wiper vanes is one of simple,
pragmatic change. Dredgemen long ago recognized the problems
with the plain shroud as shown in Fig. 14-3(A) and attempted to
control casting and matching tolerances to minimize the gap be-
tween the shroud and liner. They found this impracticable because
of high cost, and the difficulty of controlling casting dimensions.
Also, when the inevitable wear occurred and the gap widened, the
problem again presented itself.
So these practical dredgemen reasoned that if external vanes
were added to the shroud, Fig. 14-3(B), the materials would be
pumped out of the shroud-liner gap. Their reasoning proved sound.
However, the radial external vane with its square cross-sectional
shape resulted in severe cavitational wear, particularly at the high
tip speed of the periphery.
Cavitation occurs when a mechanical element is moved
through a fluid faster than the fluid can rush in to fill the displaced
volume. There is typically a high pressure area ahead of the vane
and a low pressure area behind it. Most dredgemen have seen the
results of this external vane cavitation which wears grooves in the
adjacent liner at the approximate outer diameter of the impeller,
and severely wears the impeller shroud immediately behind the
external vane. Many impellers have been discarded because of this
shroud wear, with useful life remaining in the pumping vanes.
The pragmatic dredgeman next reasoned that the external vane
could be shaped so as to minimize the cavitation effect. Therefore,
he shaped it to approximate that of the more efficient internal
pumping vane, and sloped the trailing side to minimize the cavi-
tation, Fig. 14-3(C). This helped, but still did not solve the problem.
In 1970, the writer reasoned that since the problem is one of
cavitation (a low pressure phenomenon), it should be possible to
devise an external vane to minimize cavitation by avoiding the low
THE DREDGE PUMP 145

Fig. 14-3. Dredge pump impeller external vane types. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine
Corporation.
146 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

pressure. With this in mind, the expeller vane shown in Fig. 14-
3(D) was devised.
The external impelling surface, although recessed, is the same
width as the raised external vane and provides roughly the same
pumping effect. The fundamental difference is that there is no trail-
ing surface behind the vane to cause the low pressure cavitation.
The recessed vane creates only positive pressure. This principle
has been proven in actual operation. Wear has been significantly
reduced, and no "lugging down" problem has occurred with the
recessed vane.
There are other major advantages of the design also. Note that
the recessed vane is opposite the internal pumping vane and, there-
fore, no structural strength is lost. Moreover, the width of the im-
peller and, of course, the casing in which it is mounted, is narrower
by the height of the external vanes, and therefore less costly for
the same capacity.
The mechanical efficiency of the impeller is higher because the
losses due to the braking action are largely eliminated. Since the
shroud-liner gap (as much as 3A inch for expellers with raised
vanes) has been diminished around the entire periphery to the gap
previously required between the raised vane and the shroud, the
quantity of slurry pumped from the high pressure volute areas
through the gap to the low pessure suction area, has been greatly
reduced. Also, the maximum particle size entering the gap has been
reduced. This reduction in recirculation improves the volumetric
efficiency (and output) of the pump, and, of course, partially ex-
plains the reduced wear. (The author was granted a patent, October
20, 1970, for his invention of the recessed external vane.)

CASING
The casing of the dredge pump is normally in the form of a volute
or spiral, which increases in cross-sectional area from the cutwater
to the discharge. Theoretically, this allows for a constant flow from
the impeller into the casing around its circumference, and contrib-
utes to the efficiency of the pump.
To allow for the passage of large solids, the volute area at the
cutwater is normally designed in excess of 50 percent of the dis-
charge pipe area, and increases to 100 percent or more at the dis-
THE DREDGE PUMP 147

charge. This cutwater area is greater for dredge pumps than for
water pumps, and is generally conceded to lower efficiency some-
what. There appears to be little doubt that recirculation around the
pump increases as the cutwater area increases, but experience has
shown that the dredge pump has a wide tolerance for volute area
disparities, as demonstrated by the common practice of cutting
down the diameter of the impeller to improve horsepower availa-
bility on short lines.
Regardless of efficiency, however, the dredge pump must be
capable of passing copious solids. The wide impeller, the large vo-
lute area at the cutwater, and the 3-vane impeller are all efforts to
facilitate the passage of solids. Nevertheless, the modern well-
designed dredge pump can still approach a very respectable 80
percent efficiency. With the 10-fold increase in fuel costs of the
1970s, few operators can any longer afford to operate with effi-
ciencies of only 50 to 60 percent.
A note of warning: Not all dredge pump manufacturers have
facilities which allow them to gather the data to supply accurate
performance curves to the user. Some theoretical curves have
proved inaccurate.

EYE SPEED
The impeller eye is the opening in the suction shroud through
which the slurry enters. It is normally the size of the suction pipe,
although some designs make it larger. The impeller vanes should
extend to the eye, and it should be understood that for the pur-
poses of this discussion the eye speed is the speed of the innermost
tips of the impeller vanes at the suction shroud.
Eye speed is one of the most critical factors affecting cavita-
tion. If the eye speed is so high that slurry is unable to follow the
vane closely, cavities occur which subsequently collapse violently,
causing the noisy and vibrant phenomenon called cavitation.
The eye speed should be held to a maximum of about 42 feet
per second. There are pumps in existing dredges which can run
faster, but almost invariably we find that the top speed range is not
used. Therefore, the horsepower in the drive is not fully utilized.
If this is true, the gear ratio should be increased so as to keep the
eye speed at 42 feet per second or below while demanding more
148 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

horsepower of the drive by holding the same torque but increasing

RPM (horsepower = T X N/5252).

TIP SPEED
Tip speed refers to the velocity of the outer tip of the impeller
vane. This is the most significant factor in determining head gen-
erated by the pump. Since head varies as the square of the tip
speed, and pumping distance is a function of head, the importance
of tip speed is apparent. If the tip speed is low, pumping distances
may be too low to meet the project requirements. On the other
hand, if tip speed is too high, excessive wear of the pump ensues.
See Chapter 16 for a discussion on wear.
An analysis of many successful and some unsuccessful dredge
pumps discloses a satisfactory range of tip speed would be 95 to
115 feet per second or 5,700 to 6,900 feet per minute which would
afford about 175 to 260 feet of head. There may be project condi-
tions which justify tip speeds outside this range, but for general
dredging, this range is recommended.

EYE DIAMETER VS. IMPELLER DIAMETER (OD)

It is now obvious that if an impeller is designed for the recom-
mended eye speed of 42 ft/sec and tip speed of 113 ft/sec, the ratio
of the impeller OD to eye diameter is:

This means if we have a 24-inch dredge with a 24-inch suction, a

good impeller diameter would be 24 X 2.69 = 65 inches. If the
suction were 26 inches, the impeller would be 70 inches. One of
the most successful 24-inch pumps in the industry has a 68-inch
impeller. A similar success is a 32-inch suction, 30-inch dredge with
an 84-inch impeller, a 2.625 ratio. This ratio of eye to impeller out-
side diameter is not sacrosanct, but it is an excellent guideline.
Deviation too far on the low side of the ratio could compromise
impeller performance, whereas exceeding the ratio too far on the
high side could be costly by creating an unnecessarily large pump.
THE DREDGE PUMP 149

Eye diameter in conjunction with pump RPM is very important

to pump cavitation performance. See Fig. 11-1.

HORSEPOWER COEFFICIENT, HCP

The recommended value of CHP is 1.0 for a contract pipeline
dredge. This coefficient defines a reasonable HP for any size dredge
pump. The higher the coefficient, the farther the dredge can pump;
however, higher coefficients require higher HP and can cause faster
pump wear. A CHP higher than 1.2 on abrasive material is a dubious
application.

DRIVE
A dredge pump can be driven by a steam engine (reciprocating), a
steam turbine, a gas turbine, a gasoline engine, a D.C. electric mo-
tor, an A.C. electric motor, or a diesel engine.
Steam drives, reciprocating or turbine, were at one time prev-
alent on dredges. Now, because of their weight, feedwater de-
mands, and other disadvantages, they are obsolescent. The gas tur-
bine, in spite of the concentrated development of recent years, still
has a fuel consumption disadvantage which normally disqualifies
it. The gasoline engine is almost never used because of the extreme
hazard of storing the large quantities of highly flammable fuel on
board. Also, it is normally a higher cost fuel than diesel oil.
The D.C. electric motor is an excellent, efficient application for
a dredge pump, but its first cost is so high that it is seldom used.
Also, direct current is expensive to transmit, and so the generator
must be on board or a irayor rectification of alternating current
must be made.
The A.C. electric motor, normally a wound rotor type, is a sat-
isfactory drive, but has an efficiency problem at less than full
speed. Roughly, the efficiency of a wound rotor motor is propor-
tional to the percentage of full speed at which it runs, i.e., if the
motor is running at 75 percent of full speed, it is also running
roughly at 75 percent efficiency. Since the motor runs at full speed
only on long lines, the cost of the lower efficiencies is considerable.
Also, the generator must be on board, unless the dredge has a
constant source of nearby power.
150 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

The diesel engine is by far the most common method of driving

the modern dredge pump. Whereas the A.C. motor requires a diesel
to drive a generator which transmits power through expensive
switchgear to the motor which in turn is connected to the pump,
the slow speed diesel can connect directly to the pump shaft. More
common, however, are medium speed diesels (competitively priced
because of mass production) of 900 to 1,800 RPM which drive the
pump through a gear reducer.
The marriage of the dredge pump with a diesel engine is an
almost ideal union because of their compatible characteristics.
First, the diesel is essentially a constant torque machine. This
means that the horsepower output is directly proportional to the
RPM. In Fig. 144, the full load horsepower is 970 at the rated speed
of 1,800 RPM. At 1,500 RPM, the horsepower is approximately 80
the ratio of 1,500/1,800 X 970.
Assume that the pump is running at full horsepower of 970 at
1,800 RPM when the specific gravity of the slurry increases from
1.2 to 1.25. At this point the engine would "lug down" in accor-
dance with the lug curve of Fig. 13-3. Since the pump horsepower

Fig. 14-4. Lug curve, Caterpillar D-349. Courtesy: Caterpillar Tractor Co.
THE DREDGE PUMP 151

varies directly as the specific gravity, the horsepower demand will

rise about 4 percent. The engine will put out only its maximum, or
rated horsepower, and it must slow down to work within its ca-
pabilities. As the horsepower demand of a centrifugal pump on a
given system varies as the cube of the RPM, the following rela-
tionship exists between RPM and pump horsepower requirement.
Percent Full Speed Required Horsepower Percent
100 100
99 97
98 94
97 91
96 88
95 86
90 73
85 61
80 51
75 42

It can be seen that in order to reduce the horsepower demand by

the required 4 percent, the RPM needs to be reduced slightly over
1 percent. A 2 percent reduction in RPM provides a reduction of 6
percent in horsepower, and a 20 percent reduction in RPM causes
a reduction in horsepower of almost 50 percent.
Since a 20 to 25 percent reduction in RPM is well within the
operational range of the diesel, and the efficiency loss of the engine
at reduced speeds is quite minor (unlike the A.C. motor), it is easy
to see why the diesel engine and dredge pump are well mated.
Notwithstanding the above, one of the most frequent problems
in the industry is the mismatch found on many existing dredge
pumps and their drives. It can occur when the operator decides he
needs more pump HP and acquires a bigger prime-mover without
changing the pump and/or RPM to utilize the increased HP. The
impeller may be too small, or the maximum RPM too slow to ab-
sorb the extra power. If he speeds up the pump, he may well en-
counter cavitation before reaching full engine speed, where full HP
is available. In either event, a pump would exist with the inability
to utilize the drive HP, an inefficient, uneconomic condition.
The operator should consider using a single competent supplier
for both dredge pump and drive to assure a proper match and
undivided responsibility; otherwise, procurement of the pump and
drive as separate items requires careful design coordination for
proper application. This function can be performed by the same
152 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 14-5. A 27-inch dredge pump. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.

computer program which calculates dredge rate. Such a program

is an invaluable tool for the operator.

TORSIONAL VIBRATION
One of the problems of an internal combustion engine drive is the
possibility of torsional vibration. It is not a certain occurrence, but
it is a possibility which can be reasonably predicted by conducting
a torsional vibration analysis. Many drives have been designed
without the analysis and have had no difficulty. On the other hand,
some drives have had debilitating vibration requiring a coupling
change or some other drive rearrangement.
If a new drive is being purchased, it is recommended that the
analysis be conducted, since the engine manufacturer is normally
equipped with a computer program to run it. Generally, it is con-
ducted at no charge or at a modest fee as a service to the customer.
The computer program requires physical data from the gearbox,
THE DREDGE PUMP 153

Fig. 14-6. Close-coupled dredge pump. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corporation.

couplings, shaft, and impeller which is available from the equip-

ment dimensions. The engine manufacturer can spell out in detail
the requirements of the computer program.

THRUST
Pump thrust is that axial force on the impeller which tends to move
the impeller toward the suction head. It is primarily caused by the
pump-generated pressure on the outside area of the back impeller
shroud, which is greater than the area of the front shroud because
of the eye opening.
The maximum theoretical thrust can be calculated by assuming
that the maximum pump pressure communicates itself over the
entire outside area of both shrouds. The shroud forces operate in
154 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

opposite directions, and the suction shroud pressure is deductible

from the engine side. Also, added to the suction side force, and
deductible, is the impact force of the slurry stream on the impeller.

Where F = force in pounds on impeller toward engine

W = weight in pounds of slurry per cubic foot
V = velocity of slurry in ft/sec
g = acceleration of gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
A = area of impeller eve in feet
The net thrust formula would be:

Where h = maximum head of pump

SG = maximum specific gravity of slurry
AB = area of back shroud
As = area of pump shaft
AF = area of front shroud
AE = area of impeller eye
The above formula appears quite logical. However, the author
has participated in thrust tests which indicate that the formula may
be either inadequate or unnecessarily complicated. For example,
the tests indicated that with multiple, effective wiper vanes on the
engine side, it is possible to evacuate the back shroud area to the
point of achieving a negative thrust. The effect of unusual internal
geometry, of eddy currents within the impeller, of solid particles
wedging between the shroud and head liner, etc., are so unpre-
dictable as to potentially negate the logical calculation.
To select an appropriate thrust bearing: (1) Use the pump man-
ufacturer's experience wherever possible. Note that if the pump
RPM is increased over the manufacturer's experience, the thrust
load will increase. (2) In the absence of actual experience, the
following simple thrust calculations will generally suffice.
T = 0.02 h d2
Where T = thrust in pounds
h = maximum head from pump curve in feet of water
d = diameter of back shroud in inches
Fig. 14-7. Exploded view of pump bearing assembly. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.
156 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

To provide for thrust, it is recommended that an adequate

thrust bearing be used. It is not good practice to cut holes in the
back shroud in an attempt to reduce thrust, nor have attempts
succeeded in preventing the pump pressure from communicating
itself behind the shroud. It is recommended that wiper vanes be
used on both shrouds, and if thrust bearing problems do occur,
there is a distinct possibility they can be alleviated by increasing
the number and effectiveness of the wiper vanes on the back
shroud.

SUMMARY
When procuring a dredge pump and drive, the dredgeman would
be well advised to rely upon test data where available rather than
theoretical performance curves, and to evaluate the various offer-
ings carefully against the criteria presented in this chapter.
This page intentionally left blank
Dredge ladder structure with lineshafts driving both cutter and ladder pump.
Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.
 Chapter 15

LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS

LADDER OR SUBMERGED PUMP

Until the 1950s, it was a rare shipping channel that required dredg-
ing below the depth of 42 feet. The advent of super cargo vessels,
however, has increased channel depth requirements so that today
large dredges are commonly specified for digging depths of 70 feet
or more.
Operators of conventional dredges digging in excess of 50 feet
have discovered to their dismay a sharply reduced output. This has
forced some fundamental analysis of the suction system of the hy-
draulic dredge. The problem, briefly stated, is that there is simply
not enough barometric pressure for efficient dredge operation at
the greater depths. Dredge Law V addresses this problem as dis-
cussed in Chapter 6, and indicates the solution as being the use of
the submerged or ladder pump.
The centrifugal dredge pump mounted in the dredge hull is an
ingenious machine that, when properly designed, can create a sub-
stantial vacuum of 28 feet or more of water; therefore, it can prop-
erly be considered a vacuum pump, with the concomitant ability
to impel and pass large quantities of soil-laden water while creating
substantial pressure or head. This head provides the force neces-
sary to overcome the resistance to flow in the discharge line. How-
ever, the only force to overcome the resistance to flow in the suc-
tion line is normal barometric pressure which forces slurry up
the suction line and into the evacuated pump casing.
The vacuum created by a dredge pump is a direct indication of
losses and velocity head in the suction line. At the same time, this
vacuum is only a rough indication of flow since the vacuum (re-
duction in barometric pressure) includes all flow-related factors
160 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 15-1. Ladder pump—900 horsepower electric. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine

Corporation.

(entrance loss, friction loss, velocity head) plus the specific gravity
head, hSG. Specific gravity head represents the force needed to lift
the solids content of the slurry from the sea bottom to the dredge
pump. Mathematically, it can be expressed as:

hSG = digging depth X (SGsluny SGwater) [Equation 15-1]

Calculations, testing, and actual dredge operations indicate that

sand dredging is most efficient at a slurry of 1.5 specific gravity.
Using this figure, the parenthetical value in the above expression
becomes 0.5, and then:

hSG = 0.5 digging depth

At 30 feet digging depth the specific gravity head value is 15

feet, over half of the 28-foot vacuum the dredge pump can create.
LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS 161

This leaves only 13 feet of the available barometric pressure to

provide for velocity head, entrance loss, and friction loss. The
premise is defensible that modern dredges should never be built
for depths greater than 30 feet without a ladder pump.
At 50 feet digging depth, specific gravity head would be 25 feet
if the slurry specific gravity were 1.5. This is obviously an impos-
sible condition since the 3 feet of barometric pressure remaining
is insufficient to create the necessary velocity in the suction line
to carry the 1.5 specific gravity slurry. Therefore, the operator is
forced to reduce his solids content (his payload) in favor of greater
velocity. Note that he still uses his maximum vacuum, but there is
an enforced redistribution of the 30-foot barometric pressure be-
tween specific gravity head and the velocity-related factors. Unfor-
tunately, the operator is not always provided with the necessary
instrumentation to know what redistribution he makes. He sorely
needs a production meter. If dredge owners clearly understood the
importance of this tool, few dredges would be operated today with-
out such a device.
The production meter does not solve the problem of deep dig-
ging, however. It merely allows the operator to optimize his oper-
ating conditions regardless of depth. The solution to deep digging
is a submerged pump, which when properly applied, eliminates for
all practical purposes the barometric restriction.

DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR LADDER PUMPS

These requirements are as follows:
(1) Head-capacity characteristics coordinated with those of the hull
dredge pump in order to achieve the hydraulic transport system
characteristics required
(2) Relatively maintenance-free operation and capability of passing
particles as large as, or larger than, the dredge pump to minimize
downtime
(3) Installation as far down the ladder as possible, but never less than
one-third of the distance down the ladder
(4) The minimum head provided by the submerged pump should be
one-half of the digging depth plus 15 feet
(5) A constant speed drive, as long as the ladder pump discharges to
a variable speed dredge pump; otherwise a variable speed drive
162 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

To show the effect of a submerged pump on the production of

a dredge, see the calculated production chart shown in Fig. 8-5.
Note the production of the conventional dredge at 10 feet digging
depth and 50 feet digging depth as plotted against discharge line
length. Then note the production of the same dredge, but with a
submerged pump, as shown at 50 feet digging depth. It is significant
that, with the conventional dredge, the output at 50 feet digging
depth approximates one-half of that at 10 feet digging depth. The
production of the dredge with submerged pump increases dramat-
ically at the greater digging depths, beyond that of the conventional
dredge at the shallow depth of 10 feet. The explanation of this lies
in the fact that even at 10 feet digging depth, the specific gravity
head requirement is 5 feet and therefore the amount of barometric
pressure available for the velocity factors is limited. With the sub-
merged pump, this limitation is practicably removed.

SUCTION JET BOOSTER

The suction jet booster has received considerable attention as at-
tempts have been made to solve the suction problems of a hydrau-
lic dredge. Its success has been mixed, with some applications hav-
ing been removed as unsuccessful or uneconomic. There is no
example known to the author of a submerged centrifugal pump
having been installed and subsequently removed. The reasons for
the mixed success of the suction jet booster are probably many,
including poor design, poor application (less is known of the jet
booster's performance than is known of the centrifugal pump's per-
formance), but the greatest shortcoming of the jet booster system
is its inherent reduction in the solids-carrying capacity of the
dredge pump system.
To demonstrate this, consider that one of the foremost sup-
pliers of suction jet boosters recommends that 40 percent of the
total water flow be injected as clear water into the jetting device.
This 40 percent of the slurry system does not pick up solids at the
suction head, thereby allowing only 60 percent of the total flow to
be loaded by solids. Compared to the submerged pump system
where 100 percent of the flow is available to pick up and transport
solids, there is a significant capacity difference of 67 percent in
LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS 163

Fig. 15-2. A 30-inch electric ladder pump. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.
164 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

favor of the submerged pump system:

When efficiency is considered along with the production factor, the

suction jet booster is seldom attractive. An analysis of the circum-
ferential suction jet system efficiency, from the prime mover
through the water pump and jet itself, discloses an efficiency of
under 20 percent. A comparable analysis of the submerged pump
system discloses an overall efficiency considerably higher.
It should not be construed from the above that there is never
an economic application for the suction jet booster. In the event it
is not feasible to install a submerged pump in a deep digging
dredge operation, the suction jet booster can provide relief. A test
was conducted on a West Coast dredge which resulted in the con-
clusion that under deep-digging conditions, the jet suction booster
resulted in a 30 percent increase in production over a conventional
dredge. It should be noted that the production of a conventional

Fig. 15-3. A 12-inch ladder pump, hydraulic drive. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.
LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS 165

dredge at 50 feet digging depth is only 50 percent of that at 10 feet

digging depth. Therefore, if the 50 feet digging depth production is
increased by 30 percent, the dredge capacity is increased to 65
percent of that at 10 feet digging depth. Since the capacity of the
same dredge at 60 feet digging depth with submerged pump is ap-
proximately 130 percent of the conventional dredge's productivity
at 10 feet digging depth, and therefore twice as productive as the
jet booster system, one can conclude that the above claim of 67
percent increase is perhaps modest.

NATURAL GAS PROBLEMS

In addition to production advantages, the submerged pump can
solve "gas" problems in the suction by never allowing the released
gas to expand appreciably. At 70 feet digging depth, 1 cubic foot
of gas liberated by the standard dredge expands to 10 cubic feet
at the dredge pump. This expansion results from a simple appli-
cation of Boyle's Law, where P1V1 = P2V2. Experienced dredgemen
know the effect on production of such a situation where serious
gas cavitation occurs. The properly installed submerged pump
keeps the gas under pressure, precluding the debilitating gas ex-
pansion. Also, the higher concentration of solids per gallon of
slurry significantly reduces the amount of water to be handled and
the sedimentation problem of the flow from the disposal area, thus
reducing ecological complaints.

LADDER PUMP DRIVES

Successful ladder pump drives of fixed and variable speed have
been utilized. The fixed drive units discharge into a variable speed
dredge pump which provides the flow adjustment for varying line
lengths. If a dredge is equipped with only the ladder pump, i.e., no
dredge pump, a variable speed drive is required. (Theoretically, if
the discharge line of a dredge is fixed, a competent designer can
design fixed speed pump to do the job, but this imposes such per-
manent restrictions on the system that it is practically never done.)
Ladder pump drives can be of several types, depending on
whether the units are submerged or above water; electric (AC. or
D.C.) or hydraulic; and of constant or variable speed.
166 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

The above-water drive requires a line shaft with its multiple

bearings and requirement for a rugged ladder to maintain align-
ment. Either electric or hydraulic drive can be used with the line
shaft, and either constant or variable drive. If a submerged drive
is to be used, it can either be electric or hydraulic as long as its
speed is constant. The complexities of a B.C. electric or other form
of variable electric drive make it difficult to maintain underwater,
while dissipating the heat of inefficiency. The hydraulic drive is
superior in underwater application because it is already sealed
against its environment and its speed is changed by varying the
flow of hydraulic fluid to it. If an underwater, variable drive is
required, the hydraulic drive has no peer when cost, weight, and
versatility are considered.
Submerged fixed speed A.C. electric drives are quite practical,
however. They have been successful as fluid-filled motors, as well
as cannister-enclosed, air-cooled motors. In the fluid-filled motor,
the oil or water coolant is circulated through the motor and cooled
by a heat exchanger where required. In the cannister-enclosed unit,
the motor is air cooled in the conventional manner, but a blower
is mounted on the motor shaft extension and air is circulated
through fins on the inside of the cannister, allowing the heat of

Fig. 15-4. A 14-inch booster pump. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.

LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS 167

inefficiency to be dissipated through the cannister shell to the am-

bient water.
Underwater drives can be problematical. Therefore, the oper-
ator should not be in a hurry to be the first to utilize a new unit
without a thorough analysis or complete confidence in the supplier.

BOOSTER PUMPS VS. TRANSPORT DISTANCE

The booster pump is a supplement to the dredge pump, increasing
the distance the slurry can be pumped. Dredge Law VI in Chapter
7 establishes that pumping distance is directly proportional to
horsepower available on the pumping system. Therefore, the
booster pump is brought to bear when the output of the dredge
pump is so reduced by long line conditions, that the cost of a
booster pump is justifiable by the increased productivity it
achieves.

COORDINATION WITH DREDGE PUMP

The question is frequently asked, "Should the booster pump be
identical to the dredge pump, and with the same drive?" While
production calculations and operational control are made easier if
the pump and drive are identical to the dredge pump, neither is
essential. For example, a 24-inch dredge has pumped into an 18-
inch booster, with reasonable success. Admittedly, this disparity in
size stretches the point, but the point is simple. If the flow rate of
the boosted system falls on the head-capacity curve of the booster
pump where there is net head or energy added to the slurry, the
capacity and distance of the pumping system will be enhanced. The
efficiency of the 24- to 18-inch system is suspect, since one or both
pumps will necessarily be operating far from their best efficiency
points.

WATER HAMMER
If the dredge were 18 inches and the booster 24 inches, it could
be made to work, but a different problem presents itself. One of
the serious problems of a boosted system is water hammer or as
dredgeman refer to it "ram-off." This can be more serious in a
168 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

multiple pump system than with the single dredge pump because
there are two pumps where cavitation can occur, particularly with
the booster pump having greater capacity than the dredge pump.
Also, with the greater velocity potential of two pumps, the resultant
ram-off can reach more serious proportions since the maximum
pressure rise above the normal system pressure is a multiple of
the normal system velocity.

Where hmax = maximum water hammer pressure increase

Vsw = velocity of sound in water
Vd = normal system velocity in discharge pipe
g = acceleration of gravity

Note the similarity between the above expression and velocity

head. If we use the approximate value of 4,800 feet per second for
sound in fresh water (about 5,000 ft/sec in seawater) and a normal
system velocity of 18 feet per second then:

a considerable figure.
Equation 15-2 reflects the instantaneous closure of a valve in
the system, and therefore represents a magnitude of pressure that
is higher than that normally seen in the dredge system. The most
common ram-off in a dredge system is due to cavitation when the
noncompressible water suddenly loses its impelling force, slows
down, tries to reverse direction, and sets up reflected pressure
waves acting in both directions. Since both ends of the system are
ostensibly open, the pressure waves are not always destructive.
However, many a dredgeman can document that when the condi-
tions are right, elbows can be ruptured, pumps damaged, and pipe
supports distorted.
One of the more dangerous elements in a dredge system can
be the flap valve, a useful device in helping to prime the dredge
pump. If the dredge is pumping against a high terminal elevation
and the pump loses its prime or is otherwise shut down, the slurry
tries to flow back to the dredge. When this occurs, the flap valve
LADDER AND BOOSTER PUMPS 169

(a simple, swinging check valve) closes abruptly, and water ham-

mer conditions are set up.

LOCATION OF BOOSTER
Perhaps the most common question asked about the booster pump
pertains to its location in the system. Assuming the dredge and
booster pumps to be of equal horsepower, a simple rule of thumb
says that the booster should be located at about 40 percent of the
line length. A look at Fig. 15-5, plotting the pressure gradient
against line length, discloses the reason.
If we assume both pumps have a capability of 220 feet of head;
the friction loss is 5 feet per 100 feet of line; and the dredge pump
suction losses including velocity head are 30 feet, then we can
draw the pressure gradient for locating the booster pump in vari-
ous locations.
First, the system without a booster pump would be represented
by line A-D. Since the dredge pump has a head capability of 220
feet and 30 feet is used by the suction line, point A is at 190 feet.
With a friction loss of 5 feet per 100 feet of line, the production

Fig. 15-5. Pressure gradient—dredge with booster pump at various locations.

170 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

can be pumped to 190 ^ 5 X 100 = 3,800 feet, with the pressure

gradient falling from 190 feet to zero (atmospheric).
Next, let us assume that we need to pump to 8,200 feet. It may
seem logical to locate the booster at 50 percent of the line length
at 4,100 feet, point E. We note, however, the pressure drops to 15
feet below atmospheric, and the booster pump is actually drawing
a vacuum before it adds its contribution of 220 feet head to raise
the pressure to 205 feet at point I. The system then follows the
same pressure gradient, 5 feet per 100 feet, to 8,200 feet line length
point J. The negative pressure at point E is hazardous; therefore
System AEIJ is not recommended since it could result in serious
ram-offs.
If the booster is located at 3,800 feet (46 percent of the line
length), System ADHJ is implemented. Here, under ideal condi-
tions, the slurry enters the booster at zero (atmospheric) head. If
there were no vacillations in the dredge system, this might be sat-
isfactory. However, a pressure swing of 30 feet of head in the sys-
tem is relatively common, so that this location is also hazardous.
If the booster is located at 3,300 feet (40 percent of the line
length), System ACGJ is effected. Here, the slurry enters the
booster at a head of 25 feet, providing a reasonable margin of
safety to prevent cavitation. The maximum head realized in the
system is 245 feet, easily handled by pump and pipe, so that the
booster location is satisfactory.
Since 3,300 feet, point C, is so satisfactory, why not move the
booster even closer to the dredge? Indeed, why not put the booster
on the dredge itself and implement System ABFJ? Actually, there
are good reasons for doing just that since the booster could be
operated by the dredge crew, obviating the need for the extra op-
erators at the remote location. The problem becomes one of pres-
sure capability of the booster (and of the discharge line if plastic
or worn steel pipe is used). The casing and heads are designed
normally for the pressure the pump generates itself. If the booster
is operated immediately acUacent to the dredge pump (note that
the 200 feet between points A and B is the equivalent line length
of the elbows to connect the two pumps), it must withstand the
added pressure of the dredge pump, as represented by point F on
the pressure gradient where a maximum head of 400 feet is real-
ized. If the booster is not of adequate design, the heads will deflect,
opening a space between the pump heads and impeller, resulting
Fig. 15-6. Trailer dredge sidearm raised to show draghead and submerged pump. Courtesy: Mobile
Pulley & Machine Works.
172 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

in excess recirculation from the high pressure volute to the low

pressure suction, destroying the volumetric efficiency of the pump.
The cost of increasing the pressure capability of the booster
pump heads is relatively modest. The heads are normally non-
wearing parts, and the onetime cost of adding sufficient depth to
the ribbing to withstand the addition pressure would be minor. The
additional cost of ribs on the case, a wearing part, is somewhat
more, but represents only a small part of the saving effected by
avoiding additional operators for the remote booster location. Hav-
ing the booster pump adjacent to the dredge pump has advantages
that should be considered for all long line work.

SUMMARY
As digging depths and line lengths increase, ladder pumps and
booster pumps become more commonplace and justifiable. Proper
design, placement, and utilization of these significant tools greatly
enhance the productivity and economy of the dredge.
 Chapter 16

WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES

Although the literature of the dredging industry has become more

prolific in the last three decades, good information on equipment
wear is still scarce. This is unfortunate, because wear is a source
of high cost to the dredge operator. Many of the materials pumped
are highly abrasive, and wear can not be eliminated; however, there
are ways the operator can mitigate wear and costs.
The problem of predicting erosive wear is beset by so many
variables that it discourages many dredge operators from attempt-
ing a solution. However, because erosive wear has a significant
effect on operating time and cost, the operator must understand
the principles involved in this phenomenon so that he can dis-
charge his management responsibilities reliably. An understanding
of these principles allows him to recognize the qualitative, or di-
rectional, effect of variables, which is the first step toward arriving
at reasonable quantitative predictions.
Some operators are surprisingly successful at predicting wear,
and even on projects where they err, discover in retrospect the
variable which caused the error, allowing them to make better sub-
sequent predictions. This chapter will touch upon the major vari-
ables involved with erosive wear, and will suggest a simple, math-
ematical model which can be used as an aid in predicting it and
its costs.

LIFE VS. WEAR

The life of dredge components is normally expressed in terms of
cubic yards of solids pumped. Therefore, if a pump impeller sur-
vived for 1,000,000 cubic yards, its life would be expressed as fol-
174 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

lows:

Life = or one million cubic yards per impeller

Wear is the reciprocal of life, and accordingly would be ex-

pressed as follows:

Wear = or one Pe^er per one million cubic yar

In some instances, it may prove convenient to measure wear

in mils (.001 inch) per million cubic yards, or in the metric system,
millimeters per million cubic meters of pumped solids. However,
in the final analysis, the mils must be translated into life of the
dredge component. Since the impeller wears in an irregular fash-
ion, this is difficult if not impossible. But, if experience has indi-
cated that an impeller wears out after passing one million cubic
yards, a convenient basis is established for predicting the number
of impellers needed for a project, allowing for the inclusion of their
cost. Nevertheless, defining the life of an impeller as one million
yards without designating the determining variables is as meaning-
less as stating the capacity of a dredge without indicating material
being pumped, line length, digging depth, etc. The soil to be
pumped, the job conditions, and the component design affect life
(or wear) and all must be considered.

LIFE EQUATION
A mathematical model for the life of dredge components exposed
to slurry wear follows:

Where L = life in cubic yards of solids pumped

K = best available prediction of life
H = hydraulic design factor
B = Brinnell hardness of wearing part
C = concentration of slurry (percent solids by in situ
volume)
S = size factor (outside diameter of impeller for
pump; inside diameter of pipe for pipeline)
WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES 175
V = velocity in ft/sec (of impeller vane tip for pump;
of slurry for the pipeline)
W = weight of solids vs. water (SG or density)
d50 = median diameter of solid particles
A = angularity or sharpness of solids granules

THE K FACTOR
K is defined as the best available prediction of life of the wearing
part. All predictions of the life of a wearing part start with empir-
ical data. There would be no basis for prediction without experi-
ence since there is no way to calculate the many imponderables
of abrasion. However, once any kind of wear experience is ob-
tained, the mathematical model will allow that experience to be
translated into the new job conditions and a prediction for the new
job calculated.

HYDRAULIC DESIGN FACTOR, H

The configuration of a pump determines the flow losses through it
and affects the wear rate of the pump significantly. One dredgeman,
for example, insisted that recessed wiper vanes on the impeller
shroud doubled the life of his impeller.
The H factor can only be derived from experience with the
specific pump(s) involved. When comparing the future perfor-
mance of a given pump with its past, the H factor becomes unity
and in effect drops from the equation. This would also be true for
a geometrically identical pump of a different size, although the size
factors would then apply.

THE BRINNELL HARDNESS FACTOR, B

Cornet6 found that the life of a component varied approximately
with its Brinnell hardness. For example, a steel component with a
Brinnell of 125 would last one fourth as long as a hard iron com-
ponent with a Brinnell of 500. While there are other factors such
as grain structure, toughness, or friability which affect life, hard-
ness is the most significant characteristic in this regard.
176 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

SOLIDS CONCENTRATION, C
Pokrovskaya7 plots a series of curves from test data that indicate
that wear (reciprocal of life) varies with the 0.63 power of concen-
tration up to 15 percent solids by volume. After this point, the wear
is constant, presumably because the wearing surface is barraged
by the maximum quantity of granules at 15 percent, with higher
concentrations resulting in granule on granule contact, shielding
the wearing surface from the effect of the greater quantity of solids.
Assuming a dredge operated at 50 percent dredge efficiency,
the average percent solids would be 7.5 percent by volume when
the wear becomes constant, which can be expressed as C to an
exponent of zero (W ~ C°). Since any value raised to a zero ex-
ponent equals one, the value of C for wear becomes unity, and can
be ignored in the denominator of the life equation for all dredges
which average above 7.5 percent solids, the normal situation. Cor-
net was unable to detect any effect of concentration on wear, but
he indicated that his observed variations in concentration were
small. With his efficient, instrumented dredges, the concentrations
undoubtedly averaged above 7.5 percent; thus the wear was con-
stant, indicating agreement with Pokrovskaya.
While solids concentration, C, can be ignored in the denomi-
nator of the life equation, it is of paramount importance in the
numerator. If, for example, C can be increased from an average of
10 to 20 percent, the wear increases not at all, but the cubic yards
of material transported doubles, thus doubling the component life
in terms of cubic yards.
Note that C appears in the numerator with an exponent of one,
indicating life increases directly with concentration.

PUMP SIZE, S
The S factor relates the size of the pump to wear life primarily
through an increase in production while other wear factors remain
constant.
If a 36-inch impeller pump is compared to a 72-inch impeller
pump with all other proportions increased accordingly, the flow
rate of the larger unit will logically increase at least by the square
of the diameter. The reader will recognize that as pipe size in-
WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES 177

Fig. 16-1. Worn front head liner. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.

creases, the flow must increase not only by the square of the di-
ameter, but to the 2.5 power in order to obtain the necessary tur-
bulence to convey the same concentration of solids; and so with
the pump. This states then, the production of the pump will nor-
mally increase with size to the 2.5 power, while the tip speed of
the 72-inch impeller remains the same as the 36-inch unit, creating
the same head. Since the circumference of the 72-inch impeller is
twice as large and the other dimensions are in proportion, the
pump at the same tip speed will achieve a life increase to the 2.5
power of the ratio of impeller diameters.
While no study of wear vs. pump size has been found to support
or refute these conclusions, experience in the field does support
the longer life of larger pumps. It is recommended that pump size
to the 2.5 power be used until experience allows the development
of a better figure.

VELOCITY, V
Velocity normally indicates slurry velocity with respect to a sta-
tionary surface, such as the pump case or pipeline wall. A dredge
pump impeller provides a somewhat different condition, in that it
178 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

is moving with respect to the slurry. However, it wears as a func-

tion of its velocity against the contiguous and stationary head lin-
ers, so that its velocity in the life equation is tip speed or peripheral
velocity. Impeller wear can be accelerated by high tip speed rela-
tive to slurry velocity as shown in Fig. 16-3. However, in the normal
operating range, impeller peripheral velocity fits the life equation
reasonably well.
Pokrovskaya states that pump wear is a function of velocity to
the third power of tip speed, while Cornet, as a result of years of
observation of a dredge fleet, states that pump and pipeline wear
vary as velocity to the 2.5 to 3.0 power. Pokrovskaya's data was
derived from a controlled experimental effort and may be more
accurate than the uncontrolled observation of the dredge fleet by
Cornet where other factors could have influenced the result. Since
Cornet agrees the exponent could be as high as 3, and Pokrovskaya
states it is 3, it is recommended that impeller tip speed and slurry
velocity cubed be used in the life equation.

WEIGHT OF SOLIDS, W
The kinetic energy of a particle in motion is directly proportional
to its mass; therefore, if the density or specific gravity of a trans-
ported solid is doubled, it stands to reason that, with other varia-
bles unchanged, the solids would impact the wearing component
with twice the force. Thus weight of solids is shown in the life
equation denominator to the first power, and does not appear in
the numerator since life is expressed in volume, not weight.
Most materials pumped by dredges have specific gravity of 2.65
± .05, and W can normally be ignored. A significant exception is
where organic content is high. Generally, where organic content is
high, the particle size is small, so there is a double reduction in
wear. Under these circumstances, frequently true in maintenance
dredging, wear can become a minor problem, an important consid-
eration in submitting a competitive bid.

PARTICLE SIZE, d5o

The median diameter particle size of the solids, d50, has been de-
termined to be one of the most significant characteristics in the
WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES 179

flow and wear performance of slurry. Dredges do not encounter

solids consisting of only one grain size, but the median grain size
has proved a reasonably accurate indicator of the flow
performance.
Cornet has found in dredging practice that wear varies with the
0.75 to 0.80 power of the median diameter of solid particles. Log-
ically, it might seem that wear would vary with the first power; but
in practice, there may be mitigating factors such as the viscosity
of the water or the shielding effect of the smaller particles. Ad-
mittedly, Cornet's observations of his dredging fleet were not con-
trolled experiments, but his ten years of observations and hundreds
of millions of cubic yards dredged are too sound to be refuted on
a theoretical basis. Therefore, median diameter of solid particles
is shown in the denominator to the 0.8 power. Cornet cites a telling
example where the median diameter of a material (gravel) was 8
millimeters and showed a wear 16 times as high as that shown for
a material with 0.25 mm (medium sand).
Wear = (8/0.25)080 = 16

ANGULARITY, A
Taylor8 has taken a microscopic look at soil particles, and has cat-
egorized them as: A, well-rounded; B, rounded; C, subrounded; D,
subangular; and E, angular. Wellinger9 has determined that angular
grains cause about twice the wear of well-rounded ones. If we then
assign a value of one for well-rounded, and two for angular, we
obtain the following:

Angularity Wear Factor

A, well rounded 1.00
B, rounded 1.25
C, subrounded 1.50
D, subangular 1.75
E, angular 2.00

Most dredge people are well aware that sharpness or angularity

can have an effect on wear. It is fairly common knowledge that the
wear of material in the upper reaches of the Mississippi River is
greater than that of the material near New Orleans, which has been
worn and tumbled over hundreds of miles. The author was once
180 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

associated with a job where the material was fine, but unexpect-
edly angular. The wear experience was twice as high as anticipated
by the experienced operator and resulted in a serious financial loss.

APPLICATION OF THE LIFE EQUATION

The foregoing discussion may lead the reader to conclude that the
application of the wear-life equation is difficult and complex. Not
so; it is extremely simple.
As a first example, let us assume we are using the same pump
on which we have previous experience, and the job conditions are
the same. In this case, every factor but K (the best available pre-
diction) becomes unity or one, leaving K as the logical result.
Obviously any time we use the same pump, H, B, and S drop
out, leaving only K and C in the numerator. If the C (the percent
solids of slurry) doubles, life doubles—if it halves, life halves.
As for the denominator, W (weight of solids vs. specific gravity
of water) will generally drop out, i.e., assume a value of one, since
most dredged materials have a specific gravity of 2.65. If the ma-
terial is the same as previously pumped, not only W but d^ (median
diameter of solid particles) and A (angularity of solids granules)
drop out; if the line length allows velocity optimization, V (velocity)
drops out; but even when these values do change, the equation is
a simple division or multiplication problem, or at worst, the raising
to a power, a simple matter with the hand-held calculator.

SIMPLIFIED PIPELINE LIFE EQUATION

A simplified life equation, applicable to pipelines only, follows:

This is the life equation with H eliminated, the exponent of S

reduced from 2.5 to 1, while V3 had disappeared from the denom-
inator. It is predicated upon good hydraulic practice in the opera-
tion of the dredge, i.e., the increase in flow to the 2.5 power of the
pipe diameters when a dredge is increased in size. This can be
demonstrated by assuming that the pipeline doubles in size; then,
WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES 181

from the full life equation:

S25 = (2)25 = 5.656 in the numerator
Now we know from Dredge Law III that the velocity in the larger
line must increase by the square root of the increase in size:

The life equation states that V in the denominator must be raised

to the third power:

Dividing as in the life equation:

and we obtain the increase in life corresponding to the increase in

pipe diameter. This states then, that the life of the pipe is propor-
tional to the increase in size if good dredging practice is followed,
and everything else is equal. This is not always the case, so the
operator is advised to use the simplified form of the life equation
with discretion, adjusting appropriately all factors that change.

NORMAL RANGE VALIDITY

The wear life equation only applies within normal dredge operating
ranges. It is obvious that the life of a component would be zero
cubic yards when the pump is operating under cut-off conditions
or at such low velocities that negligible solids are transported.
Practical prediction of wear requires practical operation of the
dredge.

PRESSURE
Notable by its absence in the life equation is any reference to pres-
sure. This is not an oversight, since pressure, in itself, plays no part
in wear. A dredge pipeline may have 10, 100, or 1,000 psi internal
pressure, and the wear would vary only as a function of the factors
shown in the life equation. Perhaps helpful in understanding this
is the concept of a pipeline with 1,000 psi pressure, but with zero
182 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 16-2. Worn pump case. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.

velocity. Obviously, no wear occurs, nor is any production

achieved. However, when flow begins, the transfer of energy be-
tween the slurry particles and the pipe wall commences and wear
begins. The pressure can remain at 1,000 or drop to 10 psi and still
be of no consequence to wear.

CORROSIO N
A factor not included in the life equation is corrosion. Corrosion
can occur when the pH of the slurry varies to the low (acidic) side
of the neutral position of 7, while values somewhat above 7 tend
to inhibit corrosion.
Most metals depend upon the development of a protective film
for their resistance to corrosion. Surface rust or other oxides in-
hibit corrosion. In the case of slurry lines, the abrasive solids keep
the surface of the pipe or pump free of protective coatings, and
set up an ideal regime for rapid erosive-corrosive wear.
Chemicals are so variable and perverse in their attack on met-
als that no effort is made to include a factor for corrosion in the
life of the equation. Therefore, the dredge operator should be dou-
bly wary when bidding on dredging involving industrial waste or
WEAR IN PUMPS AND PIPELINES 183

tailing pits. When a deviant pH condition is involved, the operator

should consider polyurethane pipe, a testing procedure, and an in-
crease in his bid price.

WEAR ZONES
The dredge operator should be aware that operation in the high
head, low flow portion of the dredge pump curve is achieved at
high wear cost. This is not because of high pressure, but because
of low concentration of solids, C, and high impeller tip speed, V,
both of which appear in the life equation. Note the four zones of
operation (Fig. 16-3) superimposed on a head-capacity curve of a
dredge pump. Zone I represents infinite wear and zero life because
the flow rate through the pipeline is too low to transport solids.
Zone II represents high wear and low life because V is high and C
is low. Zone III represents a more normal wear and life where the
pump approaches its highest efficiency, V is normal, and C reaches
its optimum. Zone IV represents low wear and high life in the pump
since C remains constant and production rises directly as flow,
while V drops because of low head requirements. However, while

Fig. 16-3. Pump wear vs. head-capacity curve.

184 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

this zone of operation is good for the pump, it can be bad for the
pipeline. The pipeline equation points out that life increases with
C (which reached a maximum in Zone III) and decreases with V3,
i.e., slurry velocity cubed. With an abrasive slurry, high velocities
significantly above that required to carry the optimum concentra-
tion will exact a high price in pipeline wear.

SUMMARY
Wear is a significant cost, too important for the dredge operator to
ignore. Reasonable predictions of wear are possible if the princi-
ples are understood and some records are kept. A simple mathe-
matical model (equation) is presented which can guide the opera-
tor in controlling and predicting wear and its costs. A simple rule
enabling the operator to maximize wear life is to operate with ve-
locities at or slightly above the minimum required to convey the
optimum 1.5 specific gravity slurry. A booster pump, if necessary
to increase low velocities, can pay off not only in increased pro-
duction, but in less wear per cubic yard.
 Chapter 17

AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT

Foremost among the support equipment on a modern dredge are

the winches or hauling gear. Winches can be made up in various
forms, but are generally composed of several drums, each for a
separate purpose. The normal drums are as follows:
(1) Port swing
(2) Starboard swing
(3) Ladder hoist
(4) Port anchor boom
(5) Starboard anchor boom
(6) Port spud hoist
(7) Starboard spud hoist
(8) Stern mooring (Christmas tree)

FORWARD WINCH
The forward winch is most often a 3-drum winch with a single
drive. The drums are for the port and starboard swing, plus the
ladder hoist. The single drive necessitates clutches and brakes for
each drum, normally more economic than separate drives for each
drum. The single, relatively low horsepower drive is possible since
the swing drums are never powered simultaneously, although the
ladder is occasionally hoisted while swinging. In cases where a side
slope must be dug, i.e., where box dredging or terracing on the
slope is unacceptable, additional horsepower can be supplied in
the drive to allow simultaneous ladder hoisting and swinging. Some
dredges have utilized standard hydraulic winches with individual
drives for each function, and other combinations have been used
successfully. However, the forward winch must meet various rather
strict requirements if the dredge is to be an efficient tool.
186 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

SWING SPEED
The swing speed must be infinitely variable from zero to full speed.
Stepping speeds such as obtained with wound rotor A.C. motors
are not satisfactory. Either B.C. electric, eddy current A.C., or hy-
draulic motors are required to provide the speed control needed
for efficient dredging.
Maximum line, or hauling speed, should be in excess of 100
feet per minute in order to conserve time when advancing. A swing
speed of 10 to 60 feet per minute is more normal when dredging,
and is a function of bank height and difficulty of digging. Full line
force may be required when digging, but lesser torque is required
when swinging to advance, so that field weakening, e.g., of a B.C.
drive would suffice to obtain the higher advance speed.

LINE PULL
The line pull or hauling force of the swing winch is a key attribute
of a cutterhead dredge, and is a function of the total cutter force.
See Chapter 13. In order for the full cutting force of the cutter to
be effective, the line pull of the winch must be sufficient to hold
it in the cut, i.e., the line pull must equal the cutting force, plus
supply that force needed to overcome the resistance of water,
wind, and current to the hull movement. This force is approxi-
mately 1.5 to 1.6 times the cutting force. Since the dredge is nor-
mally limited to an inclusive swing angle of less than 90°, the swing
to each side is less than 45°. The line force required to hold the
cutter in the cut is equal to the cutting force normal to the cutter,
i.e., 90°. This required force becomes the cutter force divided by
the sine of 45°, or 1.414 times the cutter force, when the dredge is
at its full swing position. Adding the effect of wind and water, the
1.5 to 1.6 factor becomes apparent.
On some small to moderately sized dredges, the ladder hoist
drum is replaced by hydraulic pistons. The pistons have the added
capability of "crowding" the cutter down into the soil, whereas
with the hoist, only the weight of the ladder can be brought to
bear.
Brums should be 15 to 20 times the diameter of the wire to
avoid undue stresses on the wire. Grooved drums are occasionally
AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 187

used to improve the spooling of the wire, but are expensive and
are normally not essential. Fleet angles (deviation from normal 90°
wire approach to drum) should not exceed l1^0. Fleeting sheaves
(where the guide sheave slides along its axis) may be necessary as
a function of the wire configuration. Some dredges mount the
drums on the top section of the ladder in order to have a straight
line to the swing sheave, and to avoid the lifting component of the
swing wire on the ladder. It is more common, particularly on large
dredges, to have the forward winch on the main deck enclosed.
Most winch brakes are regenerative (electric) or counter-
balanced (hydraulic). They should be fail-safe, i.e., the brake
should require the application of air or hydraulic power to release,
and should be set automatically by spring in the event of power
failure. The clutch works in an opposite fashion, i.e., engaged by
power, and released by spring. A modulated drag should be avail-
able on each drum to prevent excessive release and snarling when
used on the trailing swing wire. All drums should be freewheeling
for ease of wire installation and for setting of anchors.
The forward winch is a complex and important element in the
dredge function. Since so many things can go wrong and affect the
proper spooling of wire and performance of the winch, most op-
erators like to have the winch in view of the leverman. This is
certainly desirable, but many successful dredges bear witness to
the fact that it is not mandatory.

ANCHORS
Fig. 17-1 shows various types of anchors available to the dredge-
man. Swing anchors must hold if the dredge is to perform. There-
fore, the selection of anchor type and size is important. The holding
power required must be coordinated with the line pull of the swing
wire, which should be 1.5 to 1.6 times the cutting force. In order
to avoid anchor slippage, a good rule of thumb would be a holding
power of 1.6 to 2.0 times the cutting force to account for transient
overloads, particularly with electric cutter drives.
Most anchors in use today are some form of patent anchor such
as the Danforth, Stato, or Stevin. The holding power of these an-
chors can vary from as low as 6 to as high as 30 times their own
188 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 17-1. Anchor types. Adapted from Van Den Haak, "Anchors," Holland Ship-
building (October, 1972).
AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 189

weight as a function of fluke size, fluke angle, palm design, type of

bottom being dredged, etc.
Fig. 17-2 shows weights, dimensions, and holding power of var-
ious Offdrill anchors. This type of anchor has the desirable facility
of wedge inserts to change from a fluke angle of 50° for mud to a
more effective 34° angle for sand.
If we were to select an anchor from Fig. 17-2 for the 1,800-
pound force of the cutter calculated in Chapter 13, we would mul-
tiply by 1.8, the midpoint of the 1.6 to 2.0 recommended range.
This calls for a holding power of 32,400 pounds. The 1,000-pound
Offdrill anchor would be sufficient since it is rated at 35,500 pounds
in sand with a zero degree chain angle. The zero degree chain angle
is conservative in many cases for a dredge since a negative angle
is often achieved, and the anchor is pulled down rather than up.
The anchor rating on mud is only 28,500 pounds, but if mud is
being dug, the cutting force and therefore the line pull is probably
less than its maximum.
Another important anchor consideration is its breakout require-
ment when relocation is necessary. The breakout force at the pad
eye of various type anchors is estimated at 30 percent or more of
the holding power developed.10 The pad eye is normally on the base
of the fluke assembly and, on dredges, is generally attached to the
marker buoy. If the anchor has been firmly seated, the anchor
barge may have difficulty breaking out the anchor when pulling on
the pad eye wire. This breakout force can be reduced in some
instances by pulling on the shank shackle as shown in Fig. 17-3.
The first illustration shows the force of the tugboat applied through
the anchor barge stationed over the anchor. The second shows the
swing winch force applied in a similar manner. The Stevin anchor,
because of its short fluke ahead of the hinge, claims a significantly
reduced breakout force.

ANCHOR BOOMS
Anchor booms are mandatory on a dredge only when a channel is
being dug through shallows or other impassible areas, and the an-
chor barge is unable to deposit the anchors at the appropriate lo-
cations. Booms are used by choice by some operators who are
convinced that higher dredge efficiencies result. However, the con-
190 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

OFFDRILL
High Holding Power Anchor

Fig. 403

ANCHOR WEIGHT D I M E N S I O N S IN INCHES

Pounds Kg A B c 0 E G 0 SHACKLE
1.000 454 60,83 74,80 36,22 43.11 18,90 25,40 2,00
3.000 1.360 87,80 109,06 52,36 62,21 27,17 36,62 3,00
6.000 2.721 101,18 142,92 60,24 71.65 31,30 42,17 4,00
8.000 3.628 121,86 153,15 72,44 86.22 37,80 50,79 4,00
10.000 4.535 131,30 157,48 78,15 92,92 40,63 54,73 4,50
12.000 5.443 139,37 167,33 83.07 98,62 43,11 58,07 4,50
14.000 6.350 146,85 177,17 87.40 103,94 45,48 61,22 5,00
16.000 7.256 153,54 187,01 91,34 108,66 47,44 63,98 5,00
20.000 9.080 165,36 196,85 98,42 117,13 51,18 68,90 5,50
30.000 13.606 189,37 210,04 112,60 134.06 58.66 78,94 6,50

HOLDING POWER (in Ibs.)

SAND BOTTON MUD B O T T O N
ANCHOR WEIGHT
CHAIN ANGLE DEGREES CHAIN ANGLE DEGREES
Pounds KB 0* 6* 12' 6- 6* 12*

1.000 454 35.500 27.100 21.500 28.500 23.900 20.500

3.000 1.360 68.850 55.300 45.400 56.060 44.900 37.300
6.000 2.721 120.350 99.200 79.850 99.400 80.900 66.300
8.000 3.628 152.200 123.300 101.000 124.600 101.100 83.300
10.000 4.535 181.100 146.600 119.500 149.600 123.200 99.800
12.000 5.443 214.300 174.400 143.100 177.200 144.050 116.900
14.000 6.350 233.880 189.600 154.300 191.500 156.700 127.300
16,000 7.256 257.100 209.800 171.600 212.300 171.300 141.100
20.000 9.080 298.300 245.100 199.400 249.300 205.100 163.050
30.000 13.606 401 .200 316.600 255.200 325.200 265.000 208.900

Fig. 17-2. Offdrill anchor characteristics.

AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 191

Fig. 17-3. Anchor breakout techniques. Courtesy: R. Van Den Haak.

sensus among United States operators is that the limited reach and
more frequent setting as required by anchor booms tip the scales
in favor of the anchor barge. The cost of anchor booms is consid-
erable, along with the demands made on the hull for additional
freeboard and stability, so that most operators are easily dissuaded
from booms.
The anchor boom winch line connects to the anchor pad eye
or lifting bracket (not the shank shackle which is connected to the
swing winch) through a guide sheave forward of the boom foot
pivot, and on through a sheave at the top of the boom, and down

Fig. 17-4. Anchor booms. Courtesy: Ammco.

192 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 17-5. Winch, 4 drum. Courtesy: Mobile Pulley & Machine Works.

to the anchor. If an anchor has a holding capacity of 15 times its

weight, and 30 percent of the holding capacity is the breakout force
required, the line pull of the anchor boom winch (or anchor barge)
should be 4.5 to 5 times the anchor weight. A good rule of thumb
is 5.
The anchor hoisting wires must be coordinated with the swing
wire speed in order to play out or in as the dredge swings. The
anchor hoist line speed needs to be 10 to 15 percent faster than the
swing speed with modulated clutch slippage provided for automatic
speed acUustment. Obviously, port and starboard drums are required
to service their respective anchors. Drives can be separate for each
drum, or both drums can be added to the forward winch with
clutches and brakes, making it a 5-drum unit, with a single motor.

SPUD HOIST WINCHES

The usual spud winch is a 2-drum unit, one for the port, the other
for the starboard spud. If a stern mooring swivel is required, a third
drum is added.
AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 193

The line pull of the spud winch is generally equal to the weight
of the spud, but since the hoist normally has 2 parts, this provides
twice the pull to draw it from the clinging bottom. In sticky ma-
terial this can be borderline, but is generally sufficient. The line
speed should result in lifting the spud at a minimum of 30 feet per
minute to conserve time, and some operators prefer a faster speed.
Since horsepower goes up directly with speed, discretion must be
used. Note that the 2-part hoist requires a line speed of 60 feet per
minute to achieve the 30-foot per minute hoisting speed.
Spud winches can be replaced with hydraulic cylinders work-
ing through either wires or other arrangements such as jacking
mechanisms. All spud lifts should allow for free-fall in order to
penetrate the bottom for adequate holding power to resist the
swing line pull.

SPUDS
Spuds are the massive steel cylinders at the stern of the dredge
which vary from about 1 to 5 feet outside diameter, 1 to 3 inches
wall thickness, and 20 to 100 feet in length. Their purpose is to
moor the dredge while allowing it to swing and advance. Obviously
only 1 spud can be down while swinging. This down spud is called
the working spud, while the other is called the walking spud. The
walking procedure is described in Chapter 3. The length of the
spuds required is a function of the digging depth plus bottom pene-
tration when the spud is dropped. Spud outside diameter and wall
thickness are determined from the forces applied through the top
and bottom spud gates (mounted on the hull) and resisted by the
spud point penetrating the bottom. The stresses are created by the
swing wire force, plus wind and current.
Spuds are notoriously troublesome unless conservatively de-
signed and competently fabricated. Proper preheat of the massive
joints for welding, plus elimination of notches and welding cracks
are essential to good performance.
Square cross-sectional spuds have been used where rolling ca-
pabilities of heavy walled tubes were unavailable. Since the square
spud cannot rotate in its gate or keeper, its point rotates in the
bottom as the dredge swings. This has the disadvantage of wearing
194 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

the point, and jeopardizing the stability of the spud's position in

the bottom.
Hoist-operated spuds can be top lifted or collar lifted. In either
case, 2-part hoists can be used by mounting a sheave in the top of
the spud for top lift, or in the collar for collar lift. The collar is a
loose fitting, rugged fabrication encircling the spud. When the col-
lar is lifted, it transmits its force through a heavy pin which passes
completely through the spud in holes arranged at intervals along
the spud length. The advantage of the collar lift is the moderate
height of the spud frame structure required, since with the collar,
the spud can extend above the frame. For deep digging dredges,
the frame could tower as much as 100 feet above the deck for top
lift, an unwieldy and uneconomic condition. On the other hand,
once the high frame cost is absorbed, the troublesome shifting of
lift pins is precluded as digging depth changes. Also, spud walls
are not violated by the pin holes which can result in leaks and
stress failure. Top lift should be considered for moderate digging
depths.

SPUD CARRIAGE
The dual or walking spud arrangement previously described is the
norm in the United States. In Europe, many modern dredges have
utilized the spud carriage, where the working spud is mounted on
a traveling carriage, generally activated by a hydraulic cylinder. The
advent of the bucket wheel in the United States has forced the use
of the spud carriage, and higher dredge efficiencies have resulted.
Fig. 17-6 depicts the conventional spud, and in Fig. 17-7 the spud
carriage production diagrams show a significant plus for the car-
riage. Fig. 17-8 shows a bucket wheel dredge assembly, complete
with spud carriage or traveling spud.

WIRE ROPE
Wire rope is a high wear, high cost, maintenance item on a dredge.
Proper selection and application can help control costs, which can
be exorbitant otherwise.
There are several grades of wire, but only plow steel and im-
proved plow steel are acceptable for dredge application. Preformed,
AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 195

Fig. 17-6. Production diagram, walking spud.

Fig. 17-7. Production diagram, spud carriage.

196 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 17-8. Bucket wheel dredge with spud carriage. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine
Corporation.

Fig. 17-9. Wire rope lays.

AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 197

6 X 19 improved plow steel is recommended. This longer lasting

wire is somewhat more expensive, but the extra cost becomes in-
significant in view of the cost of downtime required to change
wires.
The 6 X 19 designation refers to a wire rope consisting of 6
strands of 19 filaments each. If the filaments are laid to the left,
and the strands to the right, the rope is said to be right regular lay;
if reversed, the rope is left regular lay. The Wire Rope Institute
recommends right and left lays be wound on winch drums as
shown in Fig. 16-9. Improper winding of a lay may cause the rope
to foul, crimp, and snarl, shortening its life.

Fig. 17-10. Dredge Cutter PH V plan. Includes three pumps plus cutter lineshaft.
Courtesy: Philipp Holzmann.
198 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Sheaves and drums should not have diameters less than 15

times the wire diameter, and should be greater preferably. Small
diameters and reverse bends are highly deleterious to wire rope
and are to be avoided.
Wire rope should have a breaking strength of at least 2.3 times
the maximum working force. This provides a higher safety factor
for the average working force, since the maximum force is only
applied intermittently.

SUMMARY
Properly designed and operated auxiliary equipment is essential to
the efficient operation of a dredge. The operator will do well to
reflect upon the principles of such equipment in this chapter when
selecting winches, anchors, spuds, etc.
 Chapter 18

INSTRUMENTATION AND AUTOMATIC

CONTROL

The hydraulic dredge is a unique tool in one unfortunate respect;

the operator is unable to see his production, and therefore, is un-
able to optimize his operations by visual observation. Excavation
of unseen terrain goes on beneath the water surface, while the
entrained solids pass through an opaque pipe to the deposition
area, thousands of feet or perhaps miles away. Even if the operator
could see the distant discharge, the time lag between the controlled
suction conditions and the arrival of the slurry at the deposition
area would probably cause more confusion than enlightenment.
Therefore, instruments which concurrently inform the operator
what is happening in the dredging process are essential to efficient
operation. Also, there are instances where simple automatic con-
trols are desirable and justifiable.
While the personal computer is not necessarily an instrument
installed on the dredge, it is so important to successful dredge
management that it should be a primary consideration. See Chapter
20 for further discussion.

DEFINITIONS
A sensor is the device that senses the parameter to be measured,
e.g., the curved bourdon tube in a pressure gage, which tends to
straighten with higher internal pressure.
An indicator is the readout that displays the value of the mea-
sured parameter. In the pressure gage example, as the bourdon
tube straightens, it rotates an indicating needle on a calibrated dial.
A controller is a device which accepts the sensor output, com-
pares it to a set (desired) value, and transmits an error signal to a
device capable of adjusting the measured parameter.
200 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

A positioner accepts the controller error signal and positions

a device, which results in a change in the measured parameter,
e.g., the throttle of an engine driving the pump creating the velocity
in the slurry line.

DURABILITY
Dredge instruments exist in a generally hostile environment. De-
vices that intrude into the slurry pipe are particularly vulnerable
to wear and/or damage. The marine atmosphere and the vibrations
of a hard-working dredge combine to demand ruggedness of in-
struments beyond that of most other applications. Components
should be solid state where possible, shock-absorber mounted, and
protected against the elements. Spare parts should be available for
all instruments.

ACCURACY
Accuracy of dredge instruments is desirable but not necessarily
essential. A sensor that habitually reads 10 percent low, e.g., a ve-

Fig. 18-1. Lever room control stand. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.
INSTRUMENTATION AND AUTOMATIC CONTROL 201

locity meter, can be a valuable guide to the operator as long as it

reproduces its readings consistently. The extra cost of achieving
high accuracy on dredge instrumentation is probably not
justifiable.

DREDGE POSITION
With satellites orbiting the world, the location of the dredge on the
surface of the earth within 5 meters or less can be ascertained by
Global Positioning Systems (GPS). However, the volume of soil
within 5 meters on either side of a channel could represent a siz-
able percentage of the total project cubic yards; so while the GPS
can locate the dredge with reasonable accuracy, a benchmark
agreed to by the owner and contractor is desirable for precision.
Radio signals from fixed transmission sites can be used to po-
sition the dredge with good accuracy. Many dredges still use line
of sight targets and/or laser beams for guidance. The operator has
various options today, but it should be emphasized that he should
select and become proficient with one or more, since many a cubic
yard has been pumped without compensation by an improperly
positioned dredge.
Either a gyro or magnetic compass is required to indicate the
swing of a cutterhead dredge. The gyro is expensive; less costly
devices are available that accurately measure the swing angle of
the dredge, and are generally sufficient for project control. An au-
dible warning signal on the swing system is useful to the leverman
(perhaps five degrees prior to the maximum angle of the swing).
This prompts him to reverse the swing and avoid over swinging.
In recent years, sophisticated systems showing visual displays
of the dredge and project have become available. These systems
seem to be limited only by the imagination of the developer, i.e.,
until cost is considered. They can show an overall view of the
project, completed and uncompleted dredge reaches, the location
of the dredge, its position in its swing cycle, the location of the
cutter, etc. It has the capability of quickly orienting management
to the project status, and a readout can be located in the home
office.
These systems are unquestionably appealing, but they are prob-
ably more useful to management than to the operator. Certainly,
202 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

they are costly, and the justification is dubious from the leverman's
viewpoint. The author suggests that such systems may be justifia-
ble under some circumstances, but a careful economic analysis is
recommended.

SLURRY SYSTEM
Traditionally, the dredge has had vacuum and pressure gauges for
the slurry system. The vacuum gauge, which measures the losses
in the suction line, allows the maximization of solids while avoid-
ing cavitation. The pressure gauge, which measures the losses in
the discharge line, provides information vital to the avoidance of
plugging the line. These gauges are essential instruments, and
should be installed carefully to avoid fouling of their sensor lines.
If there is a ladder pump, a combination vacuum-pressure
gauge is needed on the suction. This can be a gauge in the lever
room which is mounted on a metered air line which connects to
the suction line just ahead of the ladder pump. The air in the tube
must build up a pressure equal to the hydrostatic head at its ter-

Fig. 18-2. Dredge control console. Courtesy: IHC.

INSTRUMENTATION AND AUTOMATIC CONTROL 2003

ruination in order for the air to escape. In the event of a vacuum,

the metered air in the tube will be drawn down to indicate less
than atmospheric pressure.
The first dredge pump in the hull also requires a combination
vacuum-pressure gauge on its suction if used in conjunction with
a ladder pump. Otherwise, a vacuum gauge only is required, but it
should have a simple petcock air bleed at the control stand to allow
intermittent or continuous purging of the vacuum line to avoid
plugging and inconsistent readings.
The second dredge pump, if used, requires a pressure gauge on
the suction, and one on the discharge to indicate total line pres-
sure. This latter gauge would, of course, be used on the discharge
of the first dredge pump if a second dredge pump were not used.
This gauge is normally mounted on a stand pipe and equipped with
a water purge system to avoid plugging because of ram offs in the
dredging system.
Each pump requires RPM indication with the possible excep-
tion of the ladder pump which can normally be constant speed.
Torque or horsepower indication is desirable for each pump if die-
sel driven to avoid overloading, unless the governor is the type that
limits the torque. Such torque indication is highly desirable or even
mandatory if electric drives are used in order to avoid overload
shutdowns.
Automatic slurry velocity control is so inexpensive relative to its
value to the operation, that it should be included on most hydraulic
dredges. This control has contributed to surprisingly large in-
creases in production rate, as well as savings in fuel costs (see
Chapter 9 for dredge cycle explanation). The control is simple. As
an example, a strap-on doppler velocity meter senses the slurry
velocity, sending a corrective signal to an engine throttle controller,
functioning through an air-powered positioner. This positions the
throttle to acUust the pump speed up or down as required to keep
the slurry velocity in the selected range for efficient transport of
solids. With the all-important slurry velocity assured, the leverman
is free to devote his time to other factors which affect production.
Traditionally, the leverman has controlled his slurry system by
vacuum and discharge gauges, not because they were an accurate
indication of dredge performance, but because they were the best
indication available. Today there are several companies who offer
production meters which provide instantaneous indication of spe-
204 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

cific gravity, velocity, production rate, and integrated production.

Knowledgeable operators are aware that the intelligence provided
by such meters has the capability of increasing production sub-
stantially. A dredge which operates today under variable condi-
tions, without such intelligence to optimize its conditions, labors
under an unnecessary handicap. The production meter is highly
desirable, and considered by some to be mandatory.
The production meter combines the slurry velocity and specific
gravity meters to achieve production rate. Many operators have
reported difficulty maintaining the specific gravity indicator, nor-
mally a nuclear device emitting controlled radiation, directed to an
ionization chamber. While desirable and helpful, the SG indicator,
in the author's opinion, is not as essential as the personal computer
or the slurry velocity control to the successful management of the
hydraulic dredge.
In recent years, manufacturers have offered equipment purport-
edly capable of automating the dredge cycle. The underlying prin-
ciple is to sense SG of the slurry in the suction line, and to optimize

Fig. 18-3. Production meter. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.

INSTRUMENTATION AND AUTOMATIC CONTROL 205

it by automatically speeding or slowing the dredge swing rate with

a control system.

DREDGE CYCLE AUTOMATION

In recent years, several manufacturers have offered equipment pur-
portedly capable of automating the dredge cycle. Unfortunately,
these efforts at automation have not all been successful, and, in-
deed, it is doubtful that any models have been the unqualified suc-
cess their manufacturers had hoped for them. The major contrib-
uting factors for the lack of success have been the widely varying
topography and consistency of the bottom where employed; failure
to understand the dredge cycle thoroughly; and the considerable
complexity of the necessary circuitry which demands much tech-
nical competence and troubleshooting capability.

Velocity Measuring Gauge — NO. 2

A fairly accurate measure of the velocity in the discharge pipe can be made with
the gauge as indicated above, providing the last section of discharge pipe is
leveled to a horizontal plane. This can usually be accomplished by wedging the
last section of pipe to suit. Place two blocks near the end of the discharge pipe as
shown on the sketch. The top surface of the blocks must be in line with the inner
surface of the discharge pipe. Make a straightedge about 10 feet long, and
provide it with an offset at 90° (right angle), such that the offset is 12-1/16 inches
plus the distance from the inner surface of the pipe to the bottom face of the
straightedge, as shown above. Graduate the straightedge with four divisions per
linear foot (each subdivision being 3 inches), as shown above, the zero being
opposite the inner face of the offset. Slide the straightedge back and forth until
the offset just touches the upper surface of the water discharge, and the velocity
in feet per second can be read directly by taking the subdivision opposite the end
of the pipe. In the sketch shown above, the velocity of discharge is 16 feet per
second.
Fig. 18-4. Velocity measuring gauge.
206 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

There are few cutter dredges today that can justify full auto-
mation. Such controls are expensive to install and maintain, too
much so to buy leisure time for the leverman. The only real payoff
lies in increasing the productivity of the dredge, but this is largely
available to the leverman with the less costly PC or the production
meter intelligence with which he manually "closes the loop." It is
questionable procedure to attempt the quantum jump from a
"blind" dredge (i.e., no PC or production meter) to a completely
automated dredge. It is more advisable to allow the operators to
learn the dredging cycle thoroughly with the PC simulation. From
this higher level of knowledge, the decision concerning automation
can be made more intelligently.

CUTTER MODULE

Torque or load indication is mandatory on the cutter. In the case

of hydraulic power, the fluid pressure indication (or amps in the
case of electric power) will suffice. Almost all dredges have been
limited by cutter power at one time or another. Without the torque
indication to guide the operator, the dredging process would be
frequently interrupted by a stalled cutter.
Cutter RPM or other speed indication is desirable where vari-
able speed is available. There are optimum cutter speeds for var-
ying materials, but even when digging a material where speed
seems to be insignificant to performance, the leverman can slow
down to the lowest practical speed to reduce wear and tear. In the
absence of speed indication, an "on" light is desirable. The author,
a would-be operator, can attest to the embarrassment caused by
trying to swing the dredge with the cutter not running.

DIGGING DEPTH

An indication of digging depth is mandatory. Traditionally, this has

been accomplished by the use of a pointer on a painted gauge
located on the forward frames of the dredge. The pointer is wire
connected to the ladder to provide positive indication of the depth
as the ladder descends. The bubbler tube, previously described, is
a satisfactory alternate.
INSTRUMENTATION AND AUTOMATIC CONTROL 207

The depth indicator should be calibrated for the depth of the

suction intake at the back-ring of the cutter. Digging depth is not
the extreme reach of the cutter since only the material in the im-
mediate vicinity of the suction intake can be picked up and
transported.

SOUNDING
Lead sounding is still occasionally used to determine before and
after dredging depth. However, acoustic sounding devices, which
can provide a printed readout, are becoming more prevalent, and
are widely used by the Army Corps of Engineers. Some dredges
have acquired plotters, into which sounding data can be fed to
provide a visual picture of the channel and the work that remains
to be done.

WINCHES
All winches need torque indication to prevent stalling. Overloading
can be caused on the swing winch by dragging the ladder; on the
ladder winch by an excessive mud load; and on the spud winch by
having the spud stick in the mud.
Winch RPM or speed indication is desirable. In an open water-
way, operator disorientation is common and the ability to estimate
swing speed difficult. Many dredges control swing speed simply by
manually positioning the throttle, which is generally satisfactory.
Precise swing speed is unimportant in itself, but along with cutter
position in the bank, is the primary means to control solids content
of the slurry.

SUMMARY
There are numerous devices required to control the dredge pro-
cess, and others which are desirable. Automatic control of the
dredge cycle is rarely justified at the present state of the art, but
optimizing intelligence must be provided the leverman in order to
operate efficiently. Above all, the operators should be well versed
in the principles of hydraulic dredging. The PC is most effective in
this regard.
 Chapter 19

CALCULATING AND BIDDING

THE PROJECT

An executive of one of the large dredging companies was asked

what his company's greatest asset was. Knowing the importance
of submitting the correct bid on all projects, he responded that
while his people and his equipment were very important, he felt
that their record of past jobs showing dredge capability and costs
was their most valuable asset.
While there may be room for disagreement with this answer,
the emphasis on knowing dredge capability and relating it to the
project is not misplaced; it is frequently the difference between
financial success and failure. This chapter is devoted to project
calculation and dredge capability, with emphasis on elements of
the job which are easily overlooked in the bid calculation.

CONTRACT DOCUMENT EVALUATION

When project documents are submitted for bids, the specifications
must state the amount of material to be excavated, the location
from which it is to be removed, and where it is to be deposited.
The nature of the material should be specified, normally as deter-
mined by geotechnical analysis of selected, representative borings.
The physical parameters of the project must be specified, including
digging depth, terminal elevation, discharge line length, and di-
mensions of the excavation. Environmental restrictions must be
specified, and schedule limitations, if any, must be established.
It is the responsibility of the dredging contractor to evaluate
the owner's specifications, converting them into the time required
for his equipment to complete the job. This time is then converted
into costs, to which the contractor adds the necessary overhead
and profit to arrive at an acceptable figure for his bid.
CALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 209

METHOD OF CALCULATION
Determination of the time required for a dredge to perform a spec-
ified job is complex. Frequently it is derived from historical data,
but such data is fraught with risks. The change of a single param-
eter, e.g., swing width, bank height, or digging depth, can make a
significant difference in hourly production rate. There are many
other factors that influence rate, but the three cited are often not
recorded in the historical data; therefore, it is essential for the
operator to be able to run accurate calculations to determine the
effect of any project or equipment change on the production rate
of the dredge.
Hand-held calculators have often been used to perform dredge
production calculations. This manual technique is time consuming,
complex, and fraught with error. When the number of possible var-
iables in a dredging project are considered, e.g., 50 concentrations
of slurry, 50 digging depths, 50 terminal elevations, 15 suction line
sizes, 15 discharge line sizes, 10 different soils, 40 work-face
heights, etc., it is easy to see that there are hundreds of millions
of possible combinations. This is the type of calculation for which
the personal computer is designed.
The PC requires accurate software to perform properly. It is vital
to the dredging manager that he have an electronic model of his
dredge on hand when making profit or loss decisions regarding op-
erations. If any parameter changes, he needs to be able to insert the
correct value in his computer (e.g., a terminal elevation increase from
10 to 50 feet) and immediately detect the effect on production rate.
Experienced operators with in-house programming capability
can develop their own software, but it is a major undertaking. PC
programs are available for purchase in the dredging industry, and
it is recommended that the operator procure the best and most
accurate program available, cost notwithstanding. Chances are that
the PC software will return its total cost many times over on the
first one or two projects. The financial return on the PC and soft-
ware will probably be much greater than for the dredge itself.
There are many factors to be evaluated in planning and esti-
mating a project. The following discussion of these factors assumes
the availability of a PC with competent software, able to receive
the necessary data and calculate the hourly production rate essen-
tial to the project planning and execution.
210 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

EVALUATING A PROJECT
There are 17 factors which need to be evaluated in setting up a
project. These factors are discussed under the headings as indi-
cated below.

1. Material to Be Pumped
From the geotechnical data, the median grain size of the material
must be determined. It may be necessary to break the project into
several reaches to accommodate different soil characteristics and
d50, calculating separate production rates for each. A good PC pro-
gram is very helpful in this regard, as it can produce data for var-
ious d50s simultaneously. Figs. 19-1 and 19-2 are composite produc-
tion charts for various materials from the author's PC program for
a 27-inch dredge. Fig. 19-1 is a "D" dredge (no ladder pump) and
Fig. 19-2 is an "L" dredge (with ladder pump). If the project d50s
fall between the materials plotted on the charts, interpolation can
provide reasonable results.
Free-flowing material, which flows readily to the suction intake,
provides an improved dredge efficiency over standing material, as
shown in Fig. 3-2.

Fig. 19-1. Production chart: 27-inch dredge with 30-inch suction.

CALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 211

Fig. 19-2. Production chart: 27-inch ladder pump dredge.

2. Digging Depth
Digging depth has been established in Chapter 6 as one of the
significant factors affecting capacity of the dredge. The maximum
depth requirement of the project must be ascertained in order to
determine if the dredge has the necessary ladder length, and
whether or not a ladder pump is necessary to make the project
economically viable. A project of significant magnitude would
probably justify a ladder pump when average digging depths are
greater than 20-30 feet. The production chart of the "L" dredge
should be checked against that of the "D" dredge for production
rate differential.
Average digging depth on each type of material to be dredged
is a significant parameter for the estimator. A reasonable rate es-
timate can be obtained from the production charts for the average
depth. Tides must be considered, and a good tidal datum is impor-
tant to the leverman to avoid over- or under-digging.

3. Terminal Elevation
Normally the pipeline goes ashore and discharges about 10 feet
above water level. Therefore, it has been standard practice to build
into the production charts a 10-foot terminal elevation. Occasion-
212 REDGING IN PRACTICE

ally, however, the terminal elevation requirement is higher, and

when this occurs, the frictional equivalent in line length must be
added to the pumping distance for the chart to be applicable. For
example, if a 1.25 specific gravity slurry is being elevated 60 feet
at its termination, then 50 feet elevation (60 feet - 10 feet termina
elevation in chart) must be added in equivalent line length. If the
friction loss is 5 feet of water per 100 feet of horizontal line length,
then the additional equivalent line length would be 50 feet x
1.25 X (100 feet/5 feet) = 1,250 feet.

4. Discharge Line Length

If order to use the production chart accurately, it must be under-
stood that the discharge line length is not merely the distance from
the dredge to the disposal area. Rather, it is that distance plus the
length of the maneuvering loop behind the dredge, plus the equiv-
alent line length of all fittings such as flap valves, ball joints, swivel
elbows, tapered joints, undersized pipe, etc. The pump "feels" only
the resistance of the system, and its output is the same whether
the resistance is created by 100 feet of 20-inch pipe or 240 feet of
24-inch pipe or ten 24-inch long radius 90° elbows. But, in order to
use the convenient production chart, all resistances, including ter-
minal elevation, must be converted into equivalent length of the
dredge discharge pipe size.
Any good hydraulic reference book can provide equivalent line
lengths (or losses expressed in terms of velocity head) for fittings.
Cameron Hydraulic Data4 is good, and there are others. In the ab-
sence of better information, a reasonable estimate would be the
addition of 10 to 20 percent of the actual distance from the cut to
the disposal area to obtain equivalent line length for pricing
purposes.
The maximum project line length is significant to determine
whether it is feasible to operate without a booster pump. However
an even more significant figure is the average line length, which
provides a reasonable basis for calculation of the entire project.

5. Cutter Capability
The cutter functions as an excavator, feeding solids to the suction
mouth or intake. If the cutter has less capacity than the hydraulic
CALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 213 213

transport (slurry) system, the dredge rate must be down-graded

accordingly. See Chapter 13 and Fig. 13-10.

6. Height of Work Face (Bank Height)

The height of the work face is the height of the earthen bank the
cutter is excavating, notwithstanding its position with respect to
the water level. The distance from the bottom cut to the top of the
bank multiplied by swing width and cutter length determines the
cubic yards to be excavated by merely lowering the cutter without
advancing the dredge. This obviously affects dredge efficiency.
Generally, the low work face is encountered on maintenance
dredging, where the material is a free-flowing sand or silty material.
Here an effective technique to improve dredge efficiency may be
to over-advance and over-dig. This results in bypassing some ma-
terial, and digging other material below specified grade. However,
it has the effect of increasing the work face or bank height from
perhaps 50 percent of the cutter diameter to 100 percent, increas-
ing dredge efficiency by 10 percent and production by 20 percent.
Since the bottom material is free-flowing, it has a tendency to level
out the furrows created by the technique, leaving the bottom in a
condition as though shorter, shallower, less efficient advances had
been made. When "chasing the material" in a low work face, the
efficiency of the dredge is greatly improved by a traveling spud
carriage. Bank height has a significant effect on dredge efficiency.
See Fig. 3-2.

7. Swing Width
Dredge operators have noted their production rate increases with
the width of the channel being cut in a single swing. The wider
channel allows more material to be dredged before the lost time
of the dredge advance occurs; therefore, DE rises, increasing pro-
duction rate. Some operators have added a spud barge to the stern
to lengthen their dredge, allowing an increased swing width for a
given swing angle. This is an effective measure where the channel
design allows it. See Chapter 3.

8. Type of Advancing Mechanism

The walking spud is the most common advance mechanism for
cutterhead dredges. It is slower than the spud carriage mechanism
214 21PRACTICE

or the Christmas Tree arrangement (mooring cables). The last two

mechanisms are considered as having equal effects on DE, while
the walking spud reduces DE with respect to the other two.

9. Dredge Efficiency
DE is largely a function of soil type, bank height, swing width, and
the dredge advance mechanism. Operator skill can also be a factor
but no attempt is made to evaluate it in this book. It is feasible for
the operator to lower his estimated production rate by a small
percentage to account for inexperienced levermen. Reference to
Chapter 3 and Fig. 3-2 will refresh one's memory regarding the
method of calculating DE. Calculation by computer is highly
recommended.

10. Suction Line Size

The operator normally evaluates a project against his dredge's ex-
isting configuration, e.g., suction and discharge line sizes, pump
HP, and gearbox ratio. While it may be possible to improve perfor-
mance of a dredge on given project conditions by changing any of
the four items above, the most likely improvement (and generally
the lowest cost) involves changing the suction line size. This was
discussed in Chapters 7 and 8, Figs. 7-1 and 8-2. In brief, if the
suction line is larger than the discharge, the dredge will produce
well on short lines; if the lines are the same size, the dredge will
be relatively more productive on long lines. It is not good practice
to have the suction line smaller than the discharge for fear of plug-
ging the discharge line (see Chapter 4). With the PC, it is a quick
exercise to compare the effects of different suction line sizes. See
Fig. 19-3, which shows the effects of 20-inch and 18-inch suction
lines on a dredge that is otherwise identical.

11. Hourly Production Rate

The production rate of the dredge can now be determined by the
PC using the proper inputs for material, line sizes, digging depth,
terminal elevation, dredge efficiency, pump HP, and impeller tip
speed. Maximum discharge line length is calculated automatically.
Cutter capability becomes a factor only if it is less than that of the
slurry system.
CALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 215

Fig. 19-3. Production chart: 18-inch dredge, 20-inch vs. 18-inch suction sizes.

12. Total Project Yards

The total cubic yards in the project must be ascertained from pro-
ject data, generally from contour and prism information supplied
by the owner. Consideration of soil "swell or shrink" factors, pay-
ment on cut or fill measurement, plus intrusion of new material
after dredging should be made. Also, different methods of sounding
should be analyzed since they can provide widely divergent results,
especially in soft materials.
The total cubic yards calculated from the contract documents
seldom, if ever, represents the actual yards pumped by the dredge.
To avoid expensive re-dredging of an area (because of failure to
clean up the bottom or sides of the design prism adequately), the
leverman learns quickly that over-dredging is the economical pro-
cedure. The cubic yards involved in this over-dredging can be con-
siderable. The author has seen over-dredging as high as 50 percent,
but a more reasonable average would be 15 percent. Some con-
tracts allow payment for over-dredging within certain limits, but
others allow none at all. It is imperative that the bidder evaluate
the necessary over-dredging properly in order to arrive at the time
and cost required to perform the project. He should calculate the
216 REDGING IN PRACTICE

"design" yardage from the contract documents, add the over-

dredging percentage, and use the result as his total project yards.

13. Production Time Required

Production time is that time spent actually pumping slurry. Some
operators confuse production time with pump running time which
can be misleading. Production time is defined as calendar time
minus downtime, and downtime is defined as time not scheduled
plus unplanned, nonproductive time such as unscheduled repair,
spoil area problems, etc. Frequently, the operator will let his pump
continue to run to avoid repriming while making minor repairs; but
without the dredge digging, there is no production. If this were
considered production time, the following equation would be
inaccurate.
Production time (hours) =
total project cy
—7^ —r- [Equation 19-1
production rate cy/hr
Since we have previously established the total project cubic yards
and the dredge hourly production rate, production time in hours
becomes a simple calculation.

14. Calendar Time Required

Unfortunately, from the operator's viewpoint, his costs continue 24
hours a day, 7 days per week on a full calendar basis, whereas his
hourly production rate is effective only while digging. Some costs
are reduced when the dredge is not running, e.g., fuel and wear,
but many continue such as rent, salaries, etc. Therefore, it is es-
sential that a realistic relationship be established between calendar
time and production time. The contract and liquidated damages are
based upon calendar time, so that in the final analysis, we must
return to calendar time.
CALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 217

Perhaps the most widely accepted estimate of percent produc-

tion time is 75 percent of calendar time. Many operators claim they
operate 22 or 23 hours out of 24, but in the writer's experience,
there is as much exaggeration regarding dredge operating time as
there is about gas mileage. A realistic figure based on industry
experience provides 18 hours/day of production time, or 75 per-
cent. A taut, efficient operation may become proficient enough to
achieve 83.3 percent production time based upon the following
scenario:
7 days/wk X 24 hrs/day = 168 hrs/wk
1 8-hr shift planned maintenance = -8 hrs/wk
1 hr/shift unplanned downtime = -20 hrs/wk
Net production time = 140 hrs/wk

= .833 or 83.3 percent production time

Few operators achieve this proficiency on a consistent basis. Many
run 50-70 percent, and some even less. Over-estimation of percent
production time is a iragor cause of project failure.

15. Trash vs. Production Time

Trash, defined as any oversized material adversely affecting the
hydraulic transport system, can be so troublesome as to be worthy
of special mention. The author has seen trashy conditions so bad
as to cost the dredge 50 percent of its production or even to shut
down the operation until special provisions could be made in the
cutter, suction line, and pump. Water hyacinths, cattails, roots,
stumps, etc., can be so deleterious to a dredge's performance (par-
ticularly for small dredges up to 20" in size) that special consid-
eration should be given to reducing the estimated operating time
by several percentage points over that mentioned above. Experi-
ence is the only guideline here. The disc type cutter has shown
well in trashy situations (Chapter 13).

16. Operational Costs

The operator would be well-advised to analyze his costs to arrive
at two hourly figures for his operation: (a) total costs while pump-
218 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

ing slurry; and (b) costs while lying idle. These could be applied
to (a) production and (b) downtime hours, and the cost of the
project calculated. It is imperative that the operator omit no costs
such as overhead, depreciation, interest, wear, etc., because even-
tually the neglected cost will require an accounting. It is generally
good practice to keep the hourly costs up-to-date, and to estimate
mobilization, and other costs peculiar to the project, as additions
to the project cost.

17. Bid Price

Most operators desire to bid what the market will bear, regardless
of cost, but the genius of the free enterprise system is such as to
maintain some relationship between cost and price. It is unfortu-
nate that often the less knowledgeable operator who has omitted
some valid costs is the successful bidder. These operators either
correct their mistakes in time or experience a short life span in
the industry. It is the author's considered opinion that the correct
approach to bidding a job is to accurately calculate the costs, and
to add an acceptable overhead and profit to arrive at the bid price.

Fig. 19-4. 16,000 HP Korean dredge, DWPD-5. Courtesy: IHC.

ALCULATING AND BIDDING THE PROJECT 219 219

Some jobs will be lost to errant bids, or to hungry operators, but

the good, consistent operator will succeed in achieving his share
over a period of time.

SUMMARY
Essential to proper bidding and project calculation are the knowl-
edge of the dredge's production capabilities under varying condi-
tions, a realistic appraisal of production time, and an accurate
evaluation of costs. This information is basic to the proper man-
agement of a dredging operation; without it, the chances of eco-
nomic success are minimal. A computer with good dredge calcu-
lation software, operated by competent, experienced dredgemen,
is the most effective route to efficient project planning, bidding,
and operation.
 Chapter 20

THE PERSONAL COMPUTER IN

DREDGE MANAGEMENT

Historians will likely refer to the last two decades of the twentieth
century as the era of the personal computer revolution. The ana-
lytical ability of the PC has provided management control and ef-
ficiencies never before realized.

NEED
The potential of the PC is just beginning to be realized in the dredg-
ing industry. Some companies are using it successfully, but far too
many are still struggling with old methods that penalize their prof-
its and jeopardize their future. The purpose of this chapter is to
describe the merits of the PC to all operators and/or users of hy-
draulic dredges.
There is a large number of variables that affect the perfor-
mance of a dredge. Among these are the nature and particle size
of the soil, size of the suction and discharge lines; digging depth,
pump HP, impeller diameter and speed, line length and terminal
elevation; work face height, width of dredge swing, and whether
or not the dredge is equipped with a ladder pump. If one recognizes
that each of these variables must function with 50 different con-
centrations of slurries between 1.0 SG and the maximum practical
slurry of 1.5 SG (each of which has different rheological or flow
characteristics), it becomes obvious that there are millions of com-
binations to calculate. It is extremely difficult, time-consuming, and
error-prone to keep all these variables in proper order for a manual
calculation; however, for a personal computer, it is easy, quick, and
accurate.
THE PERSONAL COMPUTER IN DREDGE MANAGEMENT 221

SOFTWARE
Of course, the computer must have a competent software program
to direct it. If the software program is accurate, the computer be-
comes an electronic analog (model) of the dredge. The program
must allow for the entry of all physical characteristics of the
dredge, the soil, and the project. While this sounds complex, it is
actually quite simple. With good software prompting for the nec-
essary entries, there is assurance that nothing is overlooked (the
most common fault). It is significant that nothing is required as an
entry to the PC program that is not required for an accurate manual
calculation of the dredge performance, and the PC result is quicker
and more accurate. Some operators have been fearful of their per-
ceived complexity of the computer program for dredge calculation.
The truth is, the computer greatly simplifies dredge calculation,
saving much time in the process.
The first requirement of a good software program is a proven
technical data base, i.e., a table of values showing required slurry
transport velocities, friction coefficients, and pump characteristics.
For example, Fig. 4-1 shows slurry velocities required to transport
various solids at each concentration (SG). The Che chart, Fig. 1-7,
shows the coefficient necessary to adjust for loss in pump head
and efficiency as caused by the amount and nature of the solids in
the slurry. Fig. 10-2 shows the Hazen-Williams friction coefficient
for the specific gravities of various soil slurries. Also, the table
must include the operating characteristics (head, flow, and effi-
ciency) for the dredge pump as it performs on water. The computer
then converts the water data to that of the appropriate slurry.
All of these data must be included in the software by a table
that exceeds 200,000 bytes. Such an extensive table emphasizes the
complexity of manual calculations; however, by virtue of automatic
"look-up" formulas in each cell that require a table value, the com-
puter finds the values quickly and unerringly. The complex proce-
dure is made to order for the PC.

ACCURACY
How accurate is the calculation of dredge capacity by computer?
The answer is, "as accurate as the input data and the program
222 REDGING IN PRACTICE

simulation allow." A proven program can provide very good results,

well within an acceptable 10 percent range. The author has seen
instances with less than a 3 percent deviation from actual results;
however, even without such accuracy, the program has tremendous
value for the operator. If the user entered incorrect data and the
program were off by 20-25 percent, it would still show the rela-
tionship between conditions the operator needs to compare, e.g.,
the percentage reduction in capacity occurring when the line
length is increased by 5,000 feet; when digging depth is doubled;
or when coarse sand rather than fine is encountered. Under these
conditions, decisions regarding the addition of a ladder pump or
booster pump could be just as valid as though the predicted ca-
pacity were 100 percent accurate. Ultimately, perhaps the most tell
ing answer to the accuracy question is this: "The computer is more
accurate than manual calculation, and quicker and cheaper, too."

"D" VS. "L" DREDGES

The goal of the software is to be able to calculate the hourly ca-

pacity of any hydraulic dredge on any material, under any project
conditions. It quickly becomes obvious to the knowledgeable
dredgeman/programmer that two distinct programs are required,
one for the dredge with a ladder pump (type "L" for ladder), and
one for the dredge without (type "D" for dredge pump only). The
barometric limitation of the dredge without the ladder pump com-
plicates its calculation (and operation) in a major way. The com-
puter shows clearly the simplicity and advantages of the ladder
pump dredge over one not so equipped.

PC PROGRAM OUTPUT

Figs. 20-1 through 20-6 show typical operating data available from
a PC program for dredge calculations. Fig. 20-1 is the spreadsheet
for an 18-inch "D" dredge, providing optimizing data as an oper-
ating guide. Figs. 20-2 and 20-3 are two of the several production
charts derivable from the spreadsheet data. Fig. 204 is the spread-
sheet for an 18-inch "L" dredge, from which the production charts
of Figs. 20-5 and 20-6 are derived.
THE PERSONAL COMPUTER IN DREDGE MANAGEMENT 223
DSUC DPTH S6MA D.EF SGAU USUC 6PM HSL EFS UDIS C F100 DD TE HSUC CY/HR LL HP
FINE SAND .01 MM
20 10 1.50 0.40 1.200 17.09 16736 196 0.77 21. 1 119 7.73 18 10 19.4 904 1934 1080
20 20 1.50 0.40 1.200 15.12 14805 227 0.75 18.7 119 6. 16 18 10 17.7 800 3001 1134
20 30 1.50 0.40 1.200 12.85 12581 276 0.70 15.9 119 4.56 18 10 16.0 679 5246 1260
20 40 1.47 0.40 1. 188 10.94 10714 302 0.64 13.5 121 3.28 18 10 14.7 544 8 199 1273
20 50 1.39 0.40 1.156 10.87 10648 295 0.64 13.4 124 3.09 18 10 14.6 449 8509 1240
20 50 1.30 0.40 1. 120 10.59 10370 287 0.64 13. 1 127 2.81 18 10 12.3 336 9 188 1 170
20 50 1.20 0.40 1.080 9.60 9400 277 0.61 11.9 131 2.20 18 10 8.9 203 11476 1084
MEDIUM SAN D .316 MM
20 10 1.50 0.40 1.200 16.67 16328 0.74
196 20.6 115 7.80 18 10 18.9 882 19 19 1088
20 20 1.50 0.40 1.200 14.75 14444 0.72
228 18.2 115 6.22 18 10 17.3 780 2997 1155
20 30 1.50 0.40 1.198 12.64 12380 0.68
268 15.6 116 4.59 18 10 15.7 662 5031 1237
20 40 1.40 0.40 1. 160 12.60 12333 0.69
278 15.5 120 4.30 18 10 15.7 533 562 1 1265
20 50 .34 0.40 1.134 12.62 12362 0.68
280 15.6 123 4.09 18 10 15.7 447 5976 1278
20 50 .24 0.40 1.096 11.84 11594 278 0.67 14.6 128 3.38 18 10 12.4 301 7327 1213
20 50 .17 0.40 1.068 10.55 10331 273 0.63 13.0 132 2.58 18 10 9.3 190 960 1 1 139
COARSE SAN D 1.0 MM
20 10 .50 0.40 1.200 16.04 15701 194 0.71 19.8 112 7.65 18 10 18.0 848 1947 1081
20 20 .48 0.40 1.192 14.50 14201 218 0.69 17.9 113 6.22 18 10 16.8 736 2842 1128
20 30 .39 0.40 1.155 14.45 14145 230 0.70 17.8 118 5.71 18 10 16.9 593 3320 1171
20 40 .33 0.40 1.130 14.36 14064 245 0.70 17.7 120 5.44 18 10 17.0 494 3781 1238
20 50 1.28 0.40 1.112 14.25 13958 245 0.71 17.6 123 5. 17 18 10 17.0 422 4003 1225
20 50 1.21 0.40 1.084 13.00 12730 271 0.69 16.0 127 4.09 18 10 13.3 289 5841 1269
20 50 1. 15 0.40 1.060 11.50 11261 267 0.64 14.2 130 3.11 18 10 10.0 182 7739 1182
6RAUEL 10 MM
20 10 1.32 0.40 1.126 17.76 17392 176 0.71 21.9 117 8.52 18 10 19.4 592 1510 1091
20 20 1.28 0.40 1. 110 17.45 17091 188 0.72 21.5 120 7.85 18 10 19.3 508 1808 1124
20 30 1.25 0.40 1.100 17.04 16687 196 0.72 21.0 122 7.28 18 10 19.0 449 2085 1 148
20 40 1.23 0.40 1.091 16.60 16254 199 0.71 20.5 122 6.94 18 10 18.8 400 2240 1148
20 50 1.21 0.40 1.084 16.24 15899 208 0.72 20.0 124 6.46 18 10 18.5 359 2570 1 166
20 50 1. 17 0.40 1.068 15.00 14688 237 0.71 18.5 128 5.26 18 10 15.3 270 3808 1234
20 50 1. 13 0.40 1.052 13.60 13317 260 0.69 16.8 130 4.27 18 10 12.2 187 5373 1279

Fig. 20-1. Optimized spreadsheet for 18-inch dredge with 20-inch suction

Fig. 20-2. Production chart for 20 X 18 dredge on medium sand.

224 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 20-3. Production chart for 20 X 18 dredge, various materials.

DIA UEL DPTH TEL DEF SGMAX S6AU GPM HSL FIDO EFS CY/HR LL HP
F I N E SAND .01 MM
IB 10 50 10 0.40 1.28 . 112 7932 356 1.68 0.56 240 19554 1274
19 12 50 10 0.40 1.50 .200 9518 380 2.72 0.61 514 12584 1499
18 14 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 11104 379 3.62 0.67 600 9268 1583
18 16 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 12690 336 4.63 0.71 685 6183 1525
18 18 50 10 0.40 1.50 .200 14277 294 5.76 0.74 771 4111 1427
18 20 50 10 0.40 1.50 .200 15863 260 7.00 0.76 857 2788 1366
18 22 50 10 0.40 1.50 . 2 0 0 17449 228 8.35 0.77 942 1848 1298
M E D I U M SAND . 316 MM
18 10 50 10 0 . 4 0 1. 16 . 064 7932 340 1.59 0.56 137 19985 1219
18 12 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 . 2 0 0 9518 369 2.87 0.59 514 11496 1499
18 14 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 11104 368 3.82 0.65 600 8456 1583
18 16 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 . 2 0 0 12690 327 4.89 0.69 685 5627 1525
18 18 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 14277 285 6.09 0.72 771 3726 1427
18 20 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 . 2 0 0 15863 252 7.40 0.74 857 2514 1366
18 22 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 17449 221 8.82 0.75 942 1652 1298
COARSE SAND 1 . 0 MM
18 10 50 10 0 . 4 0 1. 11 . 0 4 4 7932 332 1.55 0.56 94 19952 1196
18 12 50 10 0 . 4 0 1. 19 .076 9518 338 2.33 0.59 195 13259 1367
18 14 50 10 0.40 1.50 .200 11104 354 4.03 0.63 600 7655 1583
18 16 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 12690 314 5. 16 0.66 685 5078 1525
18 18 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 14277 274 6. 42 0.69 771 3346 1427
18 20 50 10 0.40 1.50 .200 15863 243 7.80 0.71 857 2241 1366
18 22 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 . 2 0 0 17449 213 9.30 0. 72 942 1456 1298
GRAUEL 10. MM
18 10 50 10 0.40 1.05 .020 7932 323 1.50 0.55 43 20092 1169
18 12 50 10 0 . 4 0 1. 10 . 0 4 0 9518 324 2.23 0.59 103 1338 1 1321
18 14 50 10 0 . 4 0 1. 16 .064 11104 326 3. 14 0.63 192 9361 1463
18 16 50 10 0.40 1.23 .092 12690 327 4.39 0.66 315 6505 1593
18 18 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 14277 256 7.33 0.65 771 2628 1427
18 20 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 . 2 0 0 15863 227 8.91 0.67 857 1729 1366
18 22 50 10 0 . 4 0 1.50 .200 17449 198 10. 63 0.67 942 1091 1299

Fig. 20-4. Optimized spreadsheet for 18-inch dredge with ladder pump.
THE PERSONAL COMPUTER IN DREDGE MANAGEMENT 225

Fig 20.5 Produvt;n Chart for 18-inch

Fig. 20-6.
226 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

There are several useful ancillary procedures available for both

the "L" and "D" dredge programs. One or more booster pumps can
be added to the spreadsheet for all materials with a simple com-
mand. All pump data can be adjusted from the initial default values
by simple insertion of the actual values of the equipment available.
Further, the pumps can be checked against their drives for incom-
patibility (a much too common error in the industry) leading the
way to improved performance.
Parameters such as digging depth, terminal elevation, and line
size can be changed in the spreadsheet, with automatic background
recalculation providing the results quickly. Further, a convenient
"reverse" calculation is available that allows the determination of
conditions to achieve specific desired result.

SIMULATION
It is difficult to overemphasize the versatility and flexibility of a
good PC program. It calculates results for all entered data, but it
allows the experienced operator to make adjustments at any point
in the calculations to meet the dictates of his own experience. The
advantages of having an electronic simulation or model, which re-
acts as the dredge itself, are many. The answers to "what if" ques-
tions are obtained in seconds. For example, what is the effect on
dredge capacity if:
1. Digging depth is increased by 10 feet?
2. Terminal elevation is increased to 50 feet?
3. Gravel is encountered?
4. A ladder pump is used?
5. A booster pump is added?
6. Dredge pump HP is increased?

TRAINING
Perhaps the greatest advantage of the computer program is its abil-
ity to train personnel. A computer program which reacts like the
dredge is almost the perfect training tool. It shows what happens
when any variable is changed, providing reinforced learning ex-
perience for the trainee. The personnel training provided by a good
PC program can exceed that of many years of general dredging
THE PERSONAL COMPUTER IN DREDGE MANAGEMEN 227

experience. Day-to-day observation of a dredging operation is un-

questionably valuable, but it does not show the mathematical re-
lationship of each of the factors determining the capacity of a
dredge, as the PC program does. Neither does it give the macro or
overall view that the computer can. A company new to the dredg-
ing industry would find a quicker pay-out on its investment for
good PC software than for the dredge itself.
Industrial studies have shown that successful companies can
have many different characteristics, but one they have in common
is the willingness to invest in the tools and training required to
improve the performance of their personnel. The May 22, 1995,
issue of U.S. News & World Report ran an article on Motorola, a
leading U.S. electronics company. The article was entitled "A
School For Success," and states as follows: "Training isn't the only
reason for Motorola's bottom-line success, but experts contend
that the company's emphasis on continuous education is a crucial
advantage in today's marketplace. Training is the strongest variable
we see contributing to higher returns, and its importance grows
over time. And there is growing financial proof at the company that
continuous learning may be one of the smartest investments em-
ployers and employees ever make."
Dredging companies with inadequate training programs would
do well to emulate Motorola, utilizing the PC dredge computer pro-
gram as a ready-made training tool. It is readily available for all
pipeline dredges, provides continuous education, and, in the au-
thor's opinion, is the most efficient and cost-effective way to train
dredge personnel.

SUMMARY: COMPUTER ADVANTAGES

The cost of the personal computer with dredge software becomes
minor when considered in conjunction with its advantages. The
program provides the potential of:
1. Improved project plans and estimates
2. Better evaluations of bid proposals and quoted equipment
3. Improved contract administration through the understanding of
equipment capabilities and analysis of schedules
4. Improved evaluation of claims and litigation
5. Efficient, low-cost training of personnel
228 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Any organization with a financial interest in dredges will profit by

the utilization of good dredging software on the personal computer.
With the PC, quicker and more accurate answers become available,
and the financial statement will inevitably reflect the improvement.
To waive the advantages of the PC to one's competitors in the
hydraulic dredging business is economic folly.
 Chapter 21

OPERATION AND TROUBLESHOOTING

OPERATIONAL ERRORS AND HOW TO AVOID THEM

Among the most expensive mistakes a leverman can make are to
swing with both spuds down; to overtake and cut the lead swing
wire; to allow a high bank to cave in on the ladder; to bend a spud
by overswinging; and/or to get off course, or off depth.
Swinging with both spuds down results in the bending of one
or both spuds, or the failure of one or both spud gates. Good prac-
tice calls for the spud gate to be designed for failure prior to the
bending or breaking of the very expensive spuds. Unfortunately, it
is not normally feasible to design the spuds and gates to resist full
swing force, since the moment arm of the swing wire is very high
as compared to the distance between the spuds. Also, it has not
proved practical to provide limit switches and an interlock on the
swing motor to avoid swinging when both spuds are down. While
this can be done, the variable digging depths and the need to op-
erate the winches for reasons other than swinging have precluded
it. The consensus solution to the problem is proper training and
rigorous procedures.
Overtaking the swing wire occurs on the back swing when the
cutter is "overcutting" and "runs away." Reasonable back pressure
on the trailing wire helps, but the leverman should be well aware
of the hazard when he is digging hard material. He may have to
decrease his advance, decrease the depth he lowers, or in very
difficult material, it may be advisable to raise his ladder above the
bottom on the back swing, and excavate only on the undercutting
swing.
A major bank cave-in can jeopardize the dredge, not only by
bending a spud or ladder, but, as cases on record have shown, by
230 REDGING IN PRACTICE

carrying it underwater due to the increased weight of earth on the

ladder. The leverman should use great discretion when dredging a
high bank, either above or below water. If the bank is underwater,
he can terrace, rather than dig at the bottom, to allow the material
to flow to the cutter. If the bank is above water, it can be seen,
but the dredge reaction time may be too slow to avoid a cave-in.
Here, dozers, or water monitors can be used to knock down the
bank that has a tendency to cave.
When the leverman allows his dredge to get off course, or off
depth, he pumps material for which he receives no pay, and he
leaves material behind, for which he must make an expensive re-
turn trip. The following discussion will assume the operator has
obtained the necessary surveying skills to lay out the job with re-
quired reference lines as guides, and will address the problems of
advancing the dredge the proper distance while keeping on course,
without overswinging.
If two or more line-of-sight references are being used, and they
are aligned when the dredge is on the correct compass heading,
the leverman knows his dredge is on the correct course. His re-
sponsibility is to advance the dredge the proper amount, swing to
both sides of the channel, while cleaning up the bottom to the
correct depth, all the while remaining on course.

SWING ANGLE FOR ADVANCE

Assume we have a dredge with a hull length of 70 feet and a dis-
tance from the spud to the cutter of 100 feet. Assume further that
there is a distance between spuds of 10 feet, a hull width of 30
feet, and a channel width requirement of 220 feet. The material
being dug requires an advance of 5 feet for each set. See Fig. 21-1.
With the walking spud arrangement shown, we must calculate the
advance swing angle at which to start the walking action of the
dredge. The forward movement of the walking or starboard spud,
when swinging on the port spud, equals the sine of the swing angle
times the distance between spuds. One half of the desired 5-foot
advance is achieved by the walking spud; therefore,
OPERATION AND TROUBLESHOOTING 231

Fig. 21-1. Dredge plan view for swing analysis.

Advance Angle 0 equals 14.5° as obtained from our hand-held cal-

culator. The starboard spud is dropped when the dredge has swung
to the port 14.5°. Then the port spud is raised, and the dredge is
swung 14.5° past the course center-line to the starboard. Here the
port spud is lowered and the starboard spud is raised, and the
dredge has advanced 5 feet on course.

SWING WIDTH
With the maximum swing angle allowable for the dredge of 45° (in
practice it is less), the maximum swing in one direction would be:
Sine 45° X 100 feet = 70.7 feet
Swinging the same distance in the other direction gives a maximum
channel width dug in one pass of 141.4 feet. Since the required
channel is 220 feet, obviously two passes must be made. By plan-
ning a 10-foot overlap in the middle of the passes, the dredge
should be programmed for 115 feet each pass, or 57.5 feet each
side of the dredge centerline. To calculate the operating swing
angle:

ANCHOR LOCATION
Adhering to the 45°-angle limitation of swing wire to dredge cen
terline (to avoid spud overload), we lay out the 35°-swing angles
232 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

calculated above, and then the maximum 45° angle of swing wire.
See Fig. 21-2. The swing wire projections outline the limits of the
acceptable locations of the swing anchors. By scaling, we see that
with the anchor 300 feet from the channel centerline, we have ap-
proximately 115 feet acceptable advance distance for the anchor.
This represents 23 advance sets of 5 feet each. If anchor booms
were used, their reach would allow approximately 6 advance sets
to be made before the anchor would have to relocate. This shows
almost a 4 to 1 advantage for the anchor barge over booms, which
partially explains many operators' preference for the barge.
If instead of 35°-swing angles, 40° were used, the dotted lines
on Fig. 21-2 would apply. This shows that at 300 feet from channel
centerline, only 9 advances would be available before the anchors
would have to be relocated and about 2 if anchor booms were
used. While viable, this is not as convenient and efficient as the
35°-swing angle. On the other hand, the channel width with the 40°
swing is increased by approximately 14 feet over the 35° swing,
and if the width were needed, could quite possibly justify the more
frequent anchor movement. For most dredges 35° is a good, func-
tional swing angle (70° inclusive). Seldom should an angle of 40°
be exceeded on a 45°-design-basis dredge. The reason for this be-
comes obvious when using 45°-swing angles (also shown in Fig.

SWING ANGLES VS. ANCHOR POSITIONS

Fig. 21-2. Swing angles vs. anchor positions.

OPERATION AND TROUBLESHOOTIN 233

21-2), we find that the anchor line projections superimpose one on

the other leaving no room for error in anchor location or
advancement.
Spuds can, of course, be designed to a more rigorous standard,
e.g., for 50° or 60° anchor wire angles to the hull. This is expensive,
and a dubious expenditure, since extending the swing angle past
45° has the serious shortcoming of reducing the material available
to the cutter as the swing angle increases. As Fig. 21-3 shows, for
every foot of cutter advance on the channel centerline, there is
only 81.9 percent of that foot at a swing angle of 35°, 70.7 percent
at 45°, and zero at 90°.

CHANNEL WIDTH LIMITATIONS

Channel width capability increases with swing angle, but obviously
a point of diminishing returns is reached long before zero material
is available at 90°. Generally a 30°- to 40°-swing angle (60° to 80°

RADIAL ADVANCE VS. SWIN G ANGLE

SWING XRADIAL CUT
ANGLE ADVANCE WIDTH
0' 1.000 0
15' .966 51 .8
30' .866 00.0
35' .819 14.7
40' .766 28.6
45' .707 41 .4
60' .500 73.2
75' .259 93.2
90* 000 200.0

Fig. 21-3. Radial advance vs. swing angle.

234 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

inclusive) is satisfactory. This leads to a convenient rule of thumb

which states that the channel width achievable by a dredge is 100
to 130 percent of its length from spud to cutter, when the ladder
is in digging position. Fig. 21-3.
There is also a minimum swing angle when the dredge is ex-
cavating a body of water with an initial depth less than the draft
of the dredge. Fig. 21-4 shows that for the exemplary dredge, the
swing angle must be a minimum of 24° (48° inclusive) in order for
the cutter to create adequate width for the hull. To avoid this prob-
lem with conventional dredges, canal dredges have been developed
with swinging ladders mounted on trunnions at the bow of a
nonswinging hull.
The cropping of the corners of the bow of the dredge is to
alleviate the problem of minimum channel width, as well as to
avoid contact between the swing wire and the hull. Wires have
reputedly worn holes in the hull in this fashion.
The 24° minimum and 40° practical maximum swing angles
point out a design limitation which should be considered on all
cutterhead dredges. This dredge has a minimum swing width of 90

Fig. 21-4. Minimum channel width.

OPERATION AND TROUBLESHOOTIN 235

feet (in shallow digging only) and a practical maximum of 130 feet.
This relatively narrow range can be improved by lengthening the
ladder with respect to the hull. A practical ratio of hull length to
ladder extension beyond the hull is the 7 to 3 ratio of our example,
but a longer ladder (lower ratio) gives greater flexibility.

TROUBLESHOOTING
A dredge owner-operator complained of the problem of negligible
production after two days of operation. He described the condi-
tions as a high vacuum, and a low discharge pressure. Since the
material being dug was not difficult, he was confident the cutter
was not the problem.
When told that the symptoms were classic for an obstruction
in the suction line, his reply was the equivalent of "you know that,
and I know that, but this dredge doesn't seem to know that. Please
come take a look at it."
Inspection of the dredge confirmed that his vacuum was a
steady 24 inches, and his pressure only a fraction of what it should
be. Upon shutdown, there was no obstruction in the pump clean-
out, and a rod detected no problem when thrust down the suction
line. The rod was thrust up the suction inlet through the cutter,
still detecting nothing. Since high vacuum existed indicating high
losses in the suction, and low discharge pressure indicating low
losses in the discharge line, there was a disparity in apparent flows
between the suction and discharge. While these symptoms could
have occurred with high flow in the suction line with accompa-
nying high flow in a shortened (broken) discharge line, inspection
disclosed no break. Therefore, the problem was necessarily an ob-
struction in the suction line which caused low flow in both suction
and discharge. Since there was no foreign object in the suction
line, we examined the flexible suction hose at the trunnions, and
discovered the hose had collapsed to a small, flat opening. Upon
removing the hose and correcting its inside diameter, we were able
to get the dredge to work normally.
Logic and understanding the pumping system should allow the
dredge operator to diagnose most problems in minutes. Among the
most difficult to diagnose are problems with the suction hose, e.g.,
a flap torn loose from the inner lining of the hose under high vac-
236 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 21-5. 10-inch lightweight, portable dredge. Courtesy: Ellicott Machine Corp.

uum conditions, but which swing back into place under low vac-
uum. The problem cost one operator much more th an minutes of
his time. Logic eventually prevailed and he isolated the hose as the
problem, and its removal for inspection disclosed the cause.

ABNORMAL GAUGE READINGS AND THEIR MEANING

Following are some troubleshooting symptoms and their probable
causes. It should be kept in mind that vacuum indicates losses in
the suction line, while pressure indicates losses in the discharge
line.
High Vacuum—Low Pressure
This condition, described above, suggests an obstruction in the
suction line or a broken discharge line. There are other instruments
OPERATION AND TROUBLESHOOTING 237

which can supplement the information provided by the vacuum

and pressure gauges. The horsepower indicator on the pump drive
would rise significantly if the discharge line was broken, since
horsepower rises with flow rate. Further, since the engine would
probably lug down with the high load, the RPM indicator would
suggest high flow. If a production meter existed, low flow and low
production would be an immediate indication of suction line
obstruction.

High Vacuum—High Pressure

This condition is not necessarily an abnormality. If high production
is shown on the production meter, or reported at the disposal area,
the operator should continue. If production is low, it could indicate
an obstruction in both suction and discharge lines. This is relatively
rare, but can occur in trashy conditions.

Low Vacuum—High Pressure

Obviously this condition indicates low flow through the suction, so
that the high pressure is indicative of an obstruction in the dis-
charge line. On very long lines, this may be normal, since the op-
erator will have determined that to raise the vacuum by picking up
more solids, would overload his pumping system. A production
meter would be very helpful here to help control specific gravity.

Low Vacuum—Low Pressure

This condition is normally associated with inadequate pick-up of
solids. The cause could be inadequate advance, improper position-
ing of the cutter, or material too hard or too trashy for the cutter.
The condition would also occur if the pump were running too
slowly.

Noise Change
Sound or noise is a surprisingly good operational indicator to the
experienced leverman, and it is not limited to the dredge pump or
other major equipment. The writer observed a leverman who de-
tected by listening that his service water pump had shut down. It
is true that he had a service water pressure gauge on his control
panel, but this gauge merely confirmed what his auditory senses
had already told him.
238 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Excessive Swing Force

Unless accompanied by high cutter force, excessive swing force
generally means the ladder is dragging. The cause could be poor
positioning of the cutter or a bank cave-in.

Excessive Cutting Force

This condition can be caused by excessive swing speed, excessive
advance or lowering, or difficult material. In hard material it is
sometimes advisable to raise the cutter on the return swing to
avoid having the cutter "run away." The return swing under these
conditions should be accomplished at maximum swing speed to
conserve time.

SUMMARY
This chapter outlines some serious but common hazards of the
dredge. Operational procedures are explained to avoid these prob-
lems. Also, troubleshooting techniques for the slurry pumping sys-
tem are covered.
 Chapter 22

THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE DREDGE

The dredging industry has been in the middle of the great national
debate which has raged for years in regard to the environment.
This debate has been clouded by the emotions of two groups of
well-intentioned people.

ENVIRONMENTALISTS VS. DEVELOPERS

The first group includes those who have observed the process of
deterioration of our environment by the excesses of industrial and
commercial development and have dedicated themselves to halting
the process. They sometimes appear to operate on the premise that
everything natural is good, and everything man-made is bad.
The second group includes those who see the needs of the
world's burgeoning population and dedicate themselves to supply-
ing the homes, the automobiles, the minerals, etc., required by
mankind. They sometimes give the impression that any disruption
to nature is justifiable to supply man's needs.
To dispel the cloud of emotion engendered by this debate, it is
necessary to establish the essential facts and definitions which will
allow both groups to achieve a common perspective, and thus
reach agreement on appropriate policies, objectives, and proce-
dures. This is not easy.

WATER POLLUTION DEFINED

The following definition is suggested: Water pollution is any
change which affects the practical condition of the water ad-
versely for any purpose. While this definition may seem logical,
inclusive, and rigorous enough to please all, probably neither side
240 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

would endorse it enthusiastically (which perhaps makes it about

right). The developers may well say that progress requires some
sacrifice in environmental standards. On the other hand the envi-
ronmentalists may say that they must also guard against suspected
adverse affects which may not show up for years. The author, who
considers himself both an environmentalist and developer, recog-
nizes the considerable merit in both views.
Any body of water has a degree of assimilative capacity of pol-
lutants, just as the atmosphere can assimilate CO2 expelled from
the lungs of man. Therefore, addition of pollutants which can be
assimilated in a body of water without the practical condition of
the water being affected adversely would not constitute pollution
by the above definition.

POLITICS AND PUBLIC OPINION

There is no doubt that public opinion and the legislative pendulum
have swung toward the environmentalist's view in the last two dec-
ades. It is unfortunate that laws have been passed without ade-
quate knowledge, justification, or proper evaluation of their effects.
Not only has money been wasted, but some expenditures have
been counterproductive to their intent. Because of the extreme
definition of wetlands, worthy projects have been denied, and own-
ers have been deprived of their property rights. These problems
are being recognized in today's debates, and the legislative pen-
dulum shows signs it may be starting to reverse. Hopefully, this
time, we can stop the pendulum near the midpoint, where the in-
terests of mankind and the environment are properly served. Both
are worthy causes.

TURBIDITY
Most dredge people consider that among the most unreasonable
regulations are those that refer to turbidity. They recognize that at
its worst, the dredge is like a grain of sand on the beach when
compared to the turbidity effect of a spring rain, e.g., on the Mis-
sissippi, which conveys two million tons per day of silt into the
Gulf of Mexico. A moderate wind over a shallow bay or lake waters
can stir up turbidity that the dredge could never equal. Millions
THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE DREDGE 241

upon millions of dollars have been spent on dredged material de-

position areas to provide retention and settling time to reduce the
turbidity of the returning water to, say, 50 Jackson Turbidity Units
above background. This test of light transmission through an efflu-
ent sample may be justified in some cases where the receiving
waters are extraordinarily sensitive, but in most waters which have
proven to have amazing recuperative powers, the test is probably
useful largely in exercising the authority of the governing body.
Dredge people must learn to live with this, however, and Water-
ways Experiment Station Technical Report DS-78-10 Guidelines
For Designing, Operating and Managing Dredged Material Con-
tainment Areas13 is highly recommended.

DREDGE AS CLEANUP TOOL

The dredgeman and the environmentalist are not natural adver-
saries, although some members of both groups seem to operate on
the premise that they are. Actually, to clean up a polluted body of
water, the dredge is a very effective tool. There are numerous ex-
amples of dredge work in: river cleanup; beach nourishment; res-
ervoir and lake restoration; creation of bird sanctuaries; flood
control; creation of man-serving projects (e.g., Panama Canal,
New Jersey Turnpike, Washington National Airport, etc.); and many
others. Although the dredge is a disinterested, objective tool, its
use on unwise projects has led to antipathy toward the entire
dredging industry.

EFFICIENCY VS. ENVIRONMENTAL DISRUPTION

Perhaps the most important contribution the dredge operator can
make is to operate his equipment in the most efficient manner.
Instead of operating at a solids content of 10 percent, he should
operate at least at 20 percent. Note that the water per cubic yard
of material transported is reduced by more than 55 percent when
the solids content is doubled. A strong case can be made that en-
vironmental disruption is inversely proportional to the efficiency
of the dredging operation. This puts a burden on the operator that
he should gladly bear, since it contributes directly to more favor-
able economic results.
242 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

Fig. 22-1. Horizontal auger dredge for light-duty pond cleaning. Courtesy: Ellicott
Machine Corp.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The justification of any project is achieved after the facts have been
gathered and judgment rendered as to whether or not the advan-
tages of the project outweigh the disadvantages. But unfortunately,
the criteria by which the project is judged are widely divergent
depending upon the group doing the judging. The Audubon Society,
the Izaak Walton League, or the Sierra Club have their environ-
mental views, which emphasize the value of pristine, natural sites,
untouched by pollution; the industrialist and the developer have
their views which are more closely allied with the economy, human
needs, and convenience. In the final analysis, these criteria must
merge since no thinking industrialist or developer wants to elimi-
nate worthwhile flora or fauna, any more than the environmentalist
chooses to live in a cave rather than cut the trees or mine the
copper required for a decent residence.
Fig. 22-2. Bird sanctuary on dredge disposal area. From U.S. Army Corps of Engineers publication, Dredging is for the Birds.
244 DREDGING IN PRACTICE

It is essential that all developers recognize the intrinsic value

of nature's attributes and attempt to disrupt them to the minimal
extent compatible with man's well-being. On the other hand, the
environmentalist must recognize that man has a right to exist and
inevitably affects the natural scheme of things. By walking through
the woods, man damages plant life and exhales carbon dioxide into
the air. He destroys ecological microcosms as he clears a forest to
plant corn or wheat. Environmental disruption in the final analysis
is a function of population. A case can be made that the environ-
mentalist's efforts would be more productive if directed toward the
world's population explosion, rather than at the minor details of a
dredging project.
The answer does not lie in the cessation or deferral of devel-
opment projects which afford mankind the products and conven-
iences he demands; rather, we must engage in the necessary na-
tional dialogue that brings together the conflicting viewpoints,
requiring the use of the most efficient technology and allowing us
to arrive at the correct political judgment after reflecting upon the
economic, sociological, and philosophical aspects. This is not an
easy process. We cannot begin too early to sweep away the emo-
tionalism and get on with the rational judgments that are so es-
sential to the well-being of mankind and his society. Each segment
of the community has a responsibility to assist in this process, and
the dredgeman has a great stake in its success. He must recognize
that the environmental disruption of a hydraulic dredge has an in-
verse relationship to its operational efficiency; therefore, it is in-
cumbent upon him to operate in the most efficient manner. The
author sincerely hopes this book can contribute to that end.
 ABBREVIATIONS

A Area
As Area of suction pipe
AD Area of discharge pipe
C Friction coefficient for Hazen & Williams equation
cu ft or ft3 Cubic feet
m3 Cubic meters
cu yd or y3 Cubic yards
cu yd/hr Cubic yards per hour
CHP Horsepower coefficient
cv Solids fraction by true volume
Che Head-efficiency coefficient
D or d Diameter in inches
Dd Inside diameter of discharge pipe
DD Digging depth
DE Dredge efficiency
dso Median grain size of soil
DL Dredge law
Ds Inside diameter of suction pipe
flOO Friction loss per 100 feet of pipe in feet of water
F Coefficient of friction for Darcy-Weisbach equation
ft/sec Feet per second
g Acceleration of gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
Gorg Grams
gal Gallon
g/cc Grams per cubic centimeter
& Grams per liter
GPM or q Gallons per minute
Horh Head in feet of liquid
Hb Head, barometric
246 ABBREVIATIONS

He Head, entrance loss

Hf Head, friction loss
HG Mercury
HP Horsepower
hr Hour
HSG Head, specific gravity (to lift solids)
Hv Head, velocity
ID Inside diameter
Ls Suction lift (water surface to pump centerline,
+ or -)
LL Line length, discharge
1/s Liters per second
m or M Meters
m/min Meters per minute
m/s Meters per second
N or RPM Revolutions per minute
OD Outside diameter
Ibs Pounds
Ibs/cu ft Pounds per cubic foot
psi Pounds per square inch
psig Pounds per square inch gauge
q or GPM Gallons per minute
RPM or N Revolutions per minute
S or s Seconds
SG Specific gravity
SGS Specific gravity of slurry
SGW Specific gravity of water
V Velocity in feet per second
vd Velocity in discharge pipe
vs Velocity in suction pipe
w Weight per cubic foot
 USEFUL FORMULAS AND
CONVERSION FACTORS

Area of sphere = 12.566 X R2

cu yd/hr = D2 X Vel X (Avg SG-1) x .661
F = 1.09 X (100/C)186 x V186 / DL1665
GPM in pipe = 2.448 X D2 X Vel
Head (by water = Ch X (D X N/1,840)2 (D is impeller
pump) diameter)
Head (by water = Ch x V2/ 2g (V is impeller tip speed)
pump)
HP (pump) = GPM x H, / (3,960 x Es)
HP (pump) = GPM X Hw X SG/(3,960 X Ew)
HP (pump) = v x D2 x ivci.eie x ES)
HP (pump) = V x D2 X Hw x SG/(1,616 x Ew)
HP = T X N/5,252
SG = 1.1 X Volume% + 1
Torque = 5,252 X HP/N
Vel (peripheral) = D X N/229.2
Vel (in pipe) = GPM/(2.448 X D2)
Volume% (slurry) = (SGs-l)/l.l
Volume of sphere = 4.189 X R3
1 cubic meter per = 4.4 GPM
hour
1 liter per second = 3.6 m3/hr = 15.85 GPM
1 meter = 39.37 inches = 3.2808 feet

LEGEND
c = friction factor, Hazen-Williams;
c
h = coefficient of head for pump (value greater
than one);
248 USEFUL FORMULAS AND CONVERSION FACTORS

D = diameter in in.;
Es = pump efficiency on slurry;
Ew = pump efficiency on water;
F = friction loss in feet of water per 100 ft of
pipe;
g = acceleration due to gravity;
HP = horsepower;
Hs = slurry head (in feet of water);
Hw = water head (in feet of water);
N = RPM;
R = radius;
SGs = specific gravity of slurry;
T = torque in Ib ft;
V or Vel = velocity in ft/ sec;
Volume ' = percentage of in situ sand in slurry.
 REFERENCES

1. Turner, Thomas M. (1970). "The basic dredge laws." Proceed-

ings, World Dredging Conference, 411-424.
2. Huston, John (1970). Hydraulic dredging. Cornell Maritime
Press, Cambridge, Md.
3. Herbich, John B. (1975). Coastal and deep ocean dredging.
Gulf Publishing Co., Houston, Tex.
4. Cameron Hydraulic Data. (1984). Westaway and Loomis, eds.,
Ingersoll Rand.
5. Basco, David (1975). "Pump design affects performance."
World Dredging and Marine Construction, (Jan.), 10-12.
6. Cornet, R. (1975). "Wear in dredgers." The Dock and Harbor
Authority, LVI(655).
7. Pokrovskaya, V. N. "Means of increasing the effectiveness of
hydrotransport." (Notes from technical paper in author's file.)
8. Taylor, E. W. (1948). "Micro hardness testing of metals."
Institute of Metals, Vol. 74.
9. Wellinger, K, and Vetz, H. (1955). "Sliding, scouring and blast-
ing wear under influence of granular solids." VDI Forschung-
sheft, 21 B(1955), 449.
10. Van Den Haak, V. (1972), "Anchors." Holland Shipbuilding,
(Oct.), 14 A.
11. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1978). "Prediction and control
of dredges material dispersion around dredging and open-water
pipeline disposal operations." Waterways Experiment Station
Technical Report DS-78-13, Washington, D.C.
12. Terry, Leland E. (1967). "It's what's up front that counts." Pro-
ceedings, World Dredging Conference, 91-113.
13. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1978). "Guidelines for design-
ing, operating, and managing dredged material containment ar-
eas." Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report DS-78-
10, Washington, D.C.
14. Cave, I. (1976). "Effects of suspended solids on the perfor-
mance of centrifugal pumps." Hydrotransport, 4(May), 18-21.
15. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1978). "Confined disposal of
dredged material." Engineering Manual 1110-2-5027, Wash-
ington D.C.
 PUBLIC LAW 95-269—APR. 26, 1978
92 STAT. 218
PUBLIC LAW 95-269
95TH CONGRESS
An Act
Apr. 26, 1978 To amend the acts of August 11, 1888, and
(H.R. 7744) March 2, 1919, pertaining to carrying out pro-
jects for improvements of rivers and harbors
only contract or otherwise, and for other
purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled.
Rivers and That section 3 of the Act of August 11, 1888 (25
harbors, Stat. 423; 33 U.S.C. 622), is amended to read as
improvements. follows:
"Sec. 3. (a) The Secretary of the Army, act-
ing through the Chief of Engineers (hereinafter
referred to as the "Secretary"), in carrying out
projects for improvement of rivers and harbors
(other than surveys, estimates, and gagings)
shall, by contract or otherwise, carry out such
work in the manner most economical and ad-
vantageous to the United States. The Secretary
shall have dredging and related work done by
contract if he determines private industry has
the capability to do such work and it can be
done at reasonable prices and in a timely man-
ner. During the four-year period which begins
on the date of enactment of this subsection, the
Secretary may limit the application of the sec-
ond sentence of this subsection for work for
which the federally owned fleet is available to
achieve an orderly transition to full implementa-
tion of this subsection.
"(b) As private industry reasonably demon-
strates its capability under subsection (a) to
perform the work done by the federally owned
fleet, at reasonable prices and in a timely man-
ner, the federally owned fleet shall be reduced
in an orderly manner, as determined by the Sec-
retary, by retirement of plant. To carry out
PUBLIC LAW 251

emergency and national defense work the Secre-

tary shall retain only the minimum federally
owned fleet capable of performing such work
and he may exempt from the provisions of this
section such amount of work as he determines
to be reasonably necessary to keep such fleet
fully operational, as determined by the Secre-
tary, after the minimum fleet requirements have
been determined. Notwithstanding the preceding
sentence, in carrying out the reduction of the
federally owned fleet, the Secretary may retain
so much of the federally owned fleet as he de-
termines necessary, for so long as he determines
necessary, to insure the capability of the Federal
Government and private industry together to
carry out projects for improvements of rivers
and harbors. For the purpose of making the de-
termination required by the preceding sentence
the Secretary shall not exempt any work from
the requirements of this section. The minimum
federally owned fleet shall be maintained to
technologically modern and efficient standards
including replacement as necessary. The Secre-
tary is authorized and directed to
Study undertake a study to determine the minimum
federally owned fleet required to perform emer-
gency and national defense work.
Submitted to The study, which shall be submitted to Congress
Congress within two years after enactment of this subsec-
tion, shall also include preservation of employee
rights of persons
PUBLIC LAW 95-269—APR. 26, 1978
92 STAT. 219
presently employed on the existing federally
owned fleet. "Sec. 2. Section 8 of the Act of
March 2, 1919 (40 Stat 1290; 33 U.S.C. 624), is
amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 8. (a) No works of river and harbor im-
provement shall be done by private contract—
252 PUBLIC LAW

"(1) if the Secretary of the Army, acting

through the Chief of Engineers, determines that
Government plant is reasonably available to per-
form the subject work and the contract price
for doing the work is more than 25 per centum
in excess of the estimated comparable cost of
doing the work by Government plant; or
"(2) in any other circumstance where the
Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief
of Engineers, determines that the contract price
is more than 25 per centum in excess of what
he determines to be a fair and reasonable esti-
mated cost of a well-equipped contractor doing
the work.
"(b) In estimating the comparable cost of
doing the work under sub-section (a) (1) by
Government plant the Secretary of the Army,
acting through the Chief of Engineers shall, in
addition to the cost of labor and materials, take
into account proper charges for depreciation of
plant, all supervising and overhead expenses, in-
terest on the capital invested in the Government
plant (but the rate of interest shall not exceed
the maximum prevailing rate being paid by the
United States on current issues of bonds or
other evidences of indebtedness) and such other
Government expenses and charges as the Chief
of Engineers determines to be appropriate.
"(c) In determining a fair and reasonable es-
timated cost of doing work by privated contract
under subsection (a) (2), the Secretary of the
Army acting through the Chief of Engineers,
shall, in addition to the cost of labor and mate-
rials, take into account proper charges for de-
preciation of plant, all expenses for supervision,
overhead, work-men's compensation, general lia-
bility insurance, taxes (state and local), interest
on capital invested in plant, and such other ex-
penses and charges the Secretary of the Army,
acting through the Chief of Engineers, deter-
mines to be appropriate".
PUBLIC LAW 253

Approved April 26, 1978

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
HOUSE REPORT No. 95-605 (Comm. on Public Works and
Transportation)
SENATE REPORT No. 95-722 (Comm. on Environmental and
Public Works)
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
Vol. 123 (1977): Se^t. 27, considered and passed House.
Vol. 124 (1978): Apr. 5, considered and passed Senate,
amended.
Apr. 13, House agreed to Senate amendments.
This page intentionally left blank
 INDEX

Abbreviations: 245 Bucket wheel: advantages, 130;

Acceleration of gravity: 5 description, 128; disadvan-
Advance, dredge: description, tages, 131
26; diagram, 27; mechanisms, Calculating the project: chapter
213; swing angle, 230 19; use of computer, 220
Affinity laws, pump: 9 Cavitation: chapter 11; chart,
Altitude, effect on: HP, 45; suc- 95; definition, 94; eye speed
tion velocity, 44 effect, 96; pump speed ef-
Anchors: booms for, 189; calcu- fect, 96
lating weight, 189; position- Channel width limitations: 233
ing, 231; types, 187, 188 Charts: cavitation limits, 95; co-
Atmospheric pressure: see Bar- efficient head efficiency, 12;
ometric head cutter capacity, 128 ; dredge
Automation: dredge operation, cycle, 83; dredge efficiency,
205; velocity control, 203 29; Hazen-Williams friction,
Bank height: 29, 213 91; production, chapter 8; ve-
Barometric head effect on: locity limitation, 35
flow, 5; production, 43 Coefficients: head-efficiency
Basket cutter: calculations, 124; chart, 12; HP, 62, 63, 64
capacity chart, 128; configu- Computer: chapter 20, 220; ad-
ration, 117, 118, 119, 120; vantages, 227; need, 220;
cutting force, 122; descrip- software, 221, training, 226;
tion, 113; drives, 122; HP, database 221; production
123; materials of construc- charts, 223, 224, 225
tion, 127; particle passage, Costs, estimating: chapter 19, 208
128; speed, 123; torque, 121 Cutters: capacity chart, 128;
Bidding: chapter 19, 208 endless chain, 132; high
Booster pump: see Pump, speed disc, 133; see also Bas-
booster ket cutter and Bucket wheel
256 FUNDAMENTALS OF HYDRAULIC DREDGING

Diesel engine: dredge pump Formulas and conversion fac-

compatibility, 150; torque tors: 247
curve, 150 Friction loss: C coefficient, 90;
Digging depth, effect on: pro- C chart, 91; calculation, 89;
duction, 43; suction velocity, Fanning equation, 59; Hazen-
53; bidding, 211 Williams equation, 91; parti-
Discharge line size, effect on: cle size, 93; pipe size, 58;
friction, 58; line length, 60; prediction of losses, 92
production, 61, 71, 76; HP, 59 Gas vs. the dredge pump: 165
Dredge configurations: D Grain size: median, 36; classifi-
dredge, 68, 70; with ladder cation systems, 36
pump, 72, 78; with booster Gravitational force: 4
pump, 71, 77; with ladder Head losses: entrance, 51; fric-
and booster pumps, 72, 79; L tion, 52, 90; lift, 52; specific
dredge, 73, 79 gravity, 52; terminal eleva-
Dredge cycle: chart, 83; de- tion, 89, 211; velocity, 50
scription, 82, 84 Hopper dredge: 102
Dredge efficiency: chart, 29; def- Horsepower, pump: coefficient,
inition, 26; effect on the envi- 62, 63, 64; equation, 57; ef-
ronment, 241 fect on GPM, SG, head, 57;
Dredge Laws: I, 15; E, 25; m, 32; line length, 56; recom-
IV. 41; V, 49; VI, 56; VII, 69 mended, 65; vs. gpm and
Dredge types: compensated pipe diameter, 59
cutterhead, 108; cutterhead, Hydraulic dredge: definition, 3
107; plain suction, 12; trailing Impeller 141; entrance, 141; eye,
suction (hopper), 102 147; geometry, 98, 148; mount-
Drives: cutter, 122; dredge ing, 142; shrouds, 141; tip
pump, 151; ladder pump, 165; speed, 148; wiper vanes, 143
winch, 186 In situ volume: 16, 19
Efficiency: dredge, 26; dredge Instruments and controls: chap-
chart, 29; drives, 149; pump, ter 18, 199; dredge automa-
12 tion, 205; production meter,
Engine, diesel: dredge pump 203; velocity control, 203;
compatibility, 150; torque velocity gauge, 205
curve, 150 Ladder pump: see Pump,
Environment vs. the dredge: ladder
239 Life, wear: see chapter 16, 173;
Entrance loss: definition, 51; equation, 174; hardness, 175;
equation, 51 particle size, 178; velocity,
Flow regimes: 87 177; wear zones, 183
INDEX 257

Lift head: 52 Pump, centrifugal: perfor-

Limiting velocity chart: 35 mance curve, 9, 10; principle,
Line length: HP relationship, 8
56 Pump, dredge: adjustable
Line size: effect on HP, 62 mounting, 143; casing, 146;
Newtonian fluid: 7 drives, 149; Che chart, 12; el-
Operational errors: 229 evation effect, 53; eye speed,
Particle clearance, pump: 138 147; eye to diameter ratio,
Particle size vs. C factor: 93 148; head-efficiency coeffi-
Percent solids: maximum, 25 cient, 12, 149; HP coeffi-
Pollution defined: 239 cients, 62, 63, 64; impeller,
Porosity of soils: percent voids, 141; particle clearance, 138;
17; weight, effect on, 17 shaft and bearings, 142;
Production: charts, 68, 70, 71, slurry effect, 11; speed vs.
72, 73, 80; equations, 19; HP, 9; SG effect, 11; stuffing
meter, 203; percent solids ef- box, 142; tip speed, 148; tor-
fect, 11; suction size effect, sional vibration, 152; thrust,
60 153; wear lining, 139; wiper
Project calculation: chapter 18, vanes, 143
208; advancing mechanism, Pump efficiency: Che chart, 12;
213; bid price, 218; calcula- effect of slurry, 11
tion method, 209; calendar Pump, ladder: design require-
time, 216; contract docu- ments, 161; drives, 165; pro-
ments, 209; costs, 217; cutter, duction effect, 78; design, 78,
212; digging depth, 211; 79
dredge efficiency, 214; line Sand-water mixture character-
length, 212; production rate, istics: table, 18; chart, slurry,
214; production time, 216; 20
soil type, 210; swing width, Slurry, effect on hydraulics: 3,
213; suction size, 214; termi- 11
nal elevation, 211; total yard- Slurry, volume to weight con-
age, 215; trash, 217; work version: 21; grams per liter
face height, 213 conversion, 22
Public Law 95-269: 250 Soil: expansion factor, 16, 21;
Pump, booster: coordination classification chart, 37; types,
with dredge pump, 167; ef- 90
fect on line length, 167; loca- Solids percent: average, 15, 26;
tion, 169; effect on produc- chart, 20; factors affecting,
tion, 78; production charts, 26; in situ volume, 16; maxi-
72, 73, 80 mum percent volume, 25; ta-
258 FUNDAMENTALS OF HYDRAULIC DREDGING

ble sand-water mixture, 18; Training: by computer, 226

true volume, 19 Trash: 217
Solids percent: table of sand- Troubleshooting: 235; abnormal
water characteristics, 18 gauge readings, 236; exces-
Specific gravity: effect on sive swing force, 238; exces-
pump, 11 sive cutting force, 238; noise,
Specific gravity head: defini- 237
tion, 52; equation, 52 Turbidity: 240
Spuds: carriage for, 194; design, Turbulence, slurry :hydraulic
193; purpose, 193; type lift, transport effect, 32; require-
193, 194 ments for different materials,
Spreadsheet examples: 223, 224 33
Suction lift: 52 Velocity head: definition, 3;
Suction line: inlet, 115; jet equation, 4
booster, 162; optimum size, Velocity, limiting: chart, 35;
61; size effect on production, pipe size effect, 34
61; table of values, 61 Velocity, suction: altitude ef-
Suction line losses: velocity fect, 44; optimum vs. digging
head, 49; entrance, 51; fric- depth, 50, 53; pipe size ef-
tion, 52; SG head, 52; lift, 52 fect, 34; optimum vs. solids
Suction line size, effect on: bid- percent, 53
ding, 214; discharge line Volume, soils: in situ, 16, 19;
wear, 76; production, 61; true, 19; chart, 20; table, 18
pumping distance, 60 Water hammer: 167
Suction velocity: optimum, 53; Water pollution defined: 239
table for 24-inch dredge, 53; Wear: see Life, wear
computer calculation, 55 Weight, sand and mixtures: ta-
Swing width: 29, 213, 231 ble, 18; slurry chart, 20
Table: sand-water mixture char- Winches: anchor booms, 189;
acteristics, 18 brakes, 187; fleet angles, 187;
Temperature effect: on diesel swing and ladder, 185; line
HP, 45; air density, 46 pull, 186; spud hoists, 192;
Terminal elevation, 211 swing speed, 186
Test, standard penetration: 125, Wiper vanes: 143, 145
128 Wire rope: design limitations,
Thrust, pump: 153 198; type, 194
Torsional vibration: 152 Work face height: 29, 213