Fuzzy Logic Model for Equilibrium Scour Downstream

of a Dam’s Vertical Gate

Ali Uyumaz1; Abdüsselam Altunkaynak, M.ASCE2; and Mehmet Özger3

Abstract: Scour at a downstream vertical gate of a dam is investigated using a fuzzy logic inference system. The application is presented
for experimental data sets. A comparison is made between a regression formulation 共RM兲 and a fuzzy logic approach. Some restrictive
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

assumptions for RM are discussed. Here the Takagi–Sugeno 共TS兲 approach is used with a constant function in the consequent part of the
fuzzy rules. It is demonstrated that the TS model gives a lower error than the RM. Furthermore, scatter diagrams indicate that the TS
approach has superiority over the RM.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-9429共2006兲132:10共1069兲
CE Database subject headings: Scour; Fuzzy sets; Hydraulic engineering; Regression analysis; Gates; Dams.

Introduction veloped an empirical equation for time variation of maximum

In this study, scour in noncohesive soils behind vertical gates in
water structures has been investigated in the case of water flow,
both over and under the gate. In order to be able to compare
various situations, water has been allowed to flow over the gate
and then under the gate, and a series of experiments have been
performed on the basis of the assumption that there is no sus-
pended material in the water coming from upstream of the scour
hole.
The depth of scour downstream of the structures is dependent
on the time in which the high flows persist so that for model
investigations of dissipater performance, a reliable method for
establishing the model/prototype time scale, is required. Breuser
共1966, 1967兲, Farhoudi and Smith 共1982兲, and Tusuchiya and
Iwagaki 共1967兲 carried out studies on the time scale of local
scour. The formulation of scour general characteristics has been
broken down into the problems of determining the flow patterns
and its relationship to the flow transport capacity 共Laursen 1952兲.
On the other hand, Carstens 共1966兲 and Sarma 共1971兲 obtained
similarity laws for localized scour. Dey and Westrich 共2002兲 pre-
sented the result of an experimental investigation for time varia-
tion of scour and flow characteristics of the quasi-equilibrium
state of scour in a cohesive bed downstream of an apron due to a
submerged horizontal jet issuing from a sluice opening. They de-
1
Associate Professor, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Hydraulics
Division, Istanbul Technical Univ., Maslak 34469, Istanbul, Turkey.
E-mail: uyumaz@itu.edu.tr
2 In this study, experimental data sets obtained by Uyumaz
Research Assistant, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Hydraulics
Division, Istanbul Technical Univ., Maslak 34469, Istanbul, Turkey
共corresponding author兲. E-mail: altunkay@itu.edu.tr
3
Research Assistant, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Hydraulics
Division, Istanbul Technical Univ., Maslak 34469, Istanbul, Turkey.
E-mail: ozgerme@itu.edu.tr
Note. Discussion open until March 1, 2007. Separate discussions must
be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor.
The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible
publication on April 1, 2004; approved on November 1, 2005. This paper
is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 132, No. 10,
October 1, 2006. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/2006/10-1069–1075/$25.00.
scour depth. Dey and Barbhuiya 共2004兲 used the experimental
data of clear-water scour in thinly armored beds under limiting
stability of surface particles to determine the equation of maxi-
mum equilibrium scour depth through regression analysis. The
scour characteristics are correlated through the development of
empirical expressions for the time to reach the equilibrium stage,
the locations of maximum scour depth and dune peak, and the
variation of maximum scour depth with time 共Chatterjee et al.
1994兲. Mohamed and McCorquodale 共1992兲 proposed that the
limiting short-term scour depth is a function of the flow regime,
of the type of hydraulic jump, dominating the flow in the scour
hole. A total of seven flow regimes have been identified in their
study. Many investigations involving river structures require the
prediction of the scour extent that develops downstream of the
structure.
If the principle of conservation of mass is accepted, the local
rate of scour is equal to the difference between the rates of re-
moval and supply. Moreover, since no distinction is made be-
tween the supplied and the scoured materials, the rate of removal
must be equal to the local capacity of the flow. Application of this
concept to the more detailed characteristics of the scour process is
possible if certain assumptions are made regarding the flow con-
ditions at the boundary.
In research so far, investigation of scour has been carried out
in the case of water passing through a sluice gate or falls over a
weir. Nevertheless, the problem of scour when water passes under
or over a weir gate has not been investigated by many
researchers.
共1988兲 are used for the implementation of the proposed model.
The reader is referred to this source for a description of the ex-
perimental equipment and the procedure. The sole purpose of this
paper is to establish a fuzzy logic model of downstream scour at
a dam’s vertical gate and then compare it with a classical regres-
sion model.
Basics of Fuzzy Logic and Regression Model
The fuzzy approach is based on linguistic expressions that contain
ambiguity rather than numerical probabilistic, statistical, or per-

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006 / 1069

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.

 Fig. 1. General fuzzy inference system
turbation approaches. A detailed account of fuzzy logic was pre-
sented originally by Zadeh 共1965兲. Since then many researchers
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
have applied the fuzzy approach to various engineering problems
共Mamdani 1974; Pappis and Mamdani 1977; Ross 1995; Şen
2004; Xiong et al. 2001兲. Şen and Altunkaynak 共2004兲 used fuzzy
logic on hydrology for rainfall–runoff modeling. Fuzzy regression
is used to investigate the modeling uncertainty in the prediction of
bridge pier scour by Johnson and Ayyub 共1996兲. Shrestha et al.
共1996兲 studied the fuzzy rule-based control systems for reservoir
operation. Kindler 共1992兲 used fuzzy logic for optimal water al-
location. Bardossy and Disse 共1993兲 applied it to model the infil-
tration and water movement in the unsaturated zone. Pongracz et
al. 共1999兲 found that fuzzy rule-based methodology on regional
drought provided an excellent tool. Altunkaynak et al. 共2004a,b兲
have used the fuzzy logic approach in the modeling of time series
and have shown its superiority over classical approaches.
The basis of fuzzy logic is to consider the system states in the
form of subsets or fuzzy sets, each of which is labelled with
words such as “low,” “medium,” “big,” etc. A fuzzy set consists
of elements that have varying degrees of membership in the set.
This idea is in contrast with classical set theory because for crisp
sets an element is either a member of that set or not. Fuzzy rule-
based systems can be used as suitable representations of simple
and complex physical systems. A small number of fuzzy sets
leads to unrepresentative predictions whereas a large number
leads to many calculations. In practical studies, most often the
number of fuzzy sets is selected initially as 3 or 4.
A general fuzzy inference system is shown in Fig. 1. The fol-
lowing steps are necessary for the successful application of fuzzy
inference. These are:
1. Fuzzification of the input and output variables by considering
convenient linguistic subsets such as high, medium, low,
heavy, light, hot, warm, big, small, etc.,
2. Construction of fuzzy IF-THEN rules based on expert
knowledge and/or on the basis of available literature in order
to model the problem. The rules relate the combined linguis-
tic subsets of input variables to the output fuzzy sets. The
input subsets within the premise part are combined inter-
changeably with the logical “and” or “or” conjunction
whereas the rules are combined with a logical “or”
conjunction;
3. The implication part of a fuzzy system is defined as the shap-
ing of the consequent based on the premise 共antecedent兲 part;
and finally
4. The result is a fuzzy set, and therefore, requires defuzzifica-
tion to arrive at a crisp value, which is required by the ad-
ministrator or engineer.
Previously, studies concerning the possible scour downstream
of a vertical gate have been based on classical regression analysis
with restrictive assumptions such as linearity, normality 共Gauss-
ian distribution of the residuals, i.e., ⑀is兲, variance constancy, er-
godicity, and independence of residuals. However, in this study,
1070 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.
Fig. 2. Normal probability plots for: 共a兲 qo / qu; 共b兲 w
the scour is calculated using a fuzzy inference system that has no
assumptions.
The regression formulation 共RM兲 method is a curve-fitting
procedure to a scatter diagram between two or more variables. In
this case qo / qu, defined as the ratio of discharge per unit length
over and under the gate, and w, defined as the coefficient, are
used as dependent and independent variables, respectively. These
data were borrowed from Uyumaz 共1988兲 and the experimental
setup is briefly explained in the below section. The violation of
the assumption that the dependent and independent variable must
be normally distributed is shown in Fig. 2. It is clear from the Fig.
2 that qo / qu data do not fit the normal probability plot. On the
other hand, in order to measure the discrepancy existing between
observed and theoretical frequencies, the chi-square test was ap-
plied at a 0.05 significance level. The computed chi-square value
for qo / qu is 15.17. The critical value for ␹20.95 for 7 degrees of
freedom is 14.07. Then, since 15.17⬎ 14.07 the hypothesis that
the observed data fit the normal distribution is rejected. In prac-
tical applications of RM, the scatter of data points on the Carte-
sian coordinate system is not interpreted carefully, but rather the
least squares procedure is applied so as to minimize the sum of
square errors for parameter estimations. This implies that the sys-
tem dynamic is already restricted by a deterministic expression.
The following points can be cited among the drawbacks in any
RM application 共Şen et al. 2003 and 2004兲.
1. The deviations of scatter points from the fitted curve have
zero average with assumed constant variance. However, in an
actual scatter diagram most often the variance is not constant
but changes depending on the independent variable value.
For instance, there is no clear cut pattern of relationship be-
tween the variables as obvious from the scatter diagram in
Fig. 6;
2. In such a very scattered diagram the fitting of a regression
curve may pass close to a certain percentage of points, but
this cannot account for the validity of the method;
3. The prediction errors are expected to abide with a Gaussian
distribution function which is not the case in many practical
studies; and
4. The prediction errors are also expected to be independent
from each other, i.e., completely random 共noise兲.
Fuzzy Modeling Approaches
In the applications of fuzzy inference in control and forecasting,
there are two main approaches, namely, the Mamdani and the
 Fig. 3. TS ANFIS architecture showing inputs and outputs of system
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Takagi–Sugeno 共TS兲. For the Mamdani 共1974兲 approach, the out-
come of each IF-THEN rule is a fuzzy set for the output variable,
and hence the step of defuzzification is necessary to obtain a crisp
value of the output variable. The Takagi–Sugeno approach
共Takagi and Sugeno 1985兲, however, does not have a classical
defuzzification procedure and the conclusion of each IF-THEN
inference rule is a scalar rather than a fuzzy set for the output
variable. In this paper the TS method is used due to its higher
performance in the training phase when compared with the Mam-
dani approach. The main problem with TS fuzzy logic modeling
is related to the choice of the parameters 共Chen et al. 1998; Chin
and Qi 1998; Stoeva and Nikov 2000兲. There is a need for effec-
tive methods for tuning the membership functions so as to mini-
mize the error measures. For this reason, the adaptive network
based fuzzy inference system 共ANFIS兲 methodology first pro-
posed by Jang 共1993兲 is applied to optimize the parameters of the
membership functions and the consequent part by using a hybrid
learning algorithm. Various approaches have been proposed to
determine the fuzzy model parameters. Many of these approaches
use clustering techniques, genetic algorithms, gradient descent al-
gorithms, and numerical data. However in this study the simple
Fig. 4. Experimental setup
The general algorithm of a TS fuzzy inference system can
be expressed as follows. It is assumed that there are
Rr共r = 1 , 2 , ¯ , n兲 rules in the above mentioned form:
1. For each implication Ri, y i is calculated by the function f i in
the consequence
y r = f r共x1,x1, . . . ,x p兲 = br0 + br1x1 + ¯ + brpx p 共1兲
2. The weights are calculated as
rr = 共mr1⌳mr2⌳ . . . mrk兲 * Rr 共2兲
where mr1, mr2 . . . mrk denote ␣ cuts of membership functions
according to input values for the rth rule. The occurrence
probability is shown by Rr and ⌳ represents the minimum
operator. For the sake of simplicity Rr is equal to 1, and
finally;
3. The final output y inferred from n implications is given as
the weighted average of all y r with the weights rr as
n

and efficient methods of neural network back-propagation 兺 rr*y r

learning algorithm and least squares are used to determine the r=1
y= n 共3兲
parameters of the membership functions and the consequent part
parameters, respectively. The general scheme of the ANFIS is 兺 rr
ri=1
shown in Fig. 3. Inputs and their membership functions appear to
the left of the fuzzy inference system, while outputs and the equa-
tions appear on the right. The fuzzy logic toolbox of MATLAB is
used to calculate these parameters. Application and Interpretation
For the TS fuzzy system, the IF-THEN control rules are given
implicitly as follows: The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 4. Two bed materials of
homogeneous and noncohesive soil are used in the experiments.
Rr:IF共x1 is Ar共1兲,x2 is Ar共2兲, . . . ,x p is Ar共p兲兲 THEN y r The physical properties of the materials used in the model are
= f r共x1,x2, . . . ,x p兲 given in Table 1. Granulometric curves of the materials used in

where Ar共i兲⫽fuzzy set corresponding to a partitioned domain of the

input variable x j in the rth IF-THEN rule; p=number of input
variables; f r共.兲⫽function; and y r=output of rth IF-THEN infer-
ence rule, Rr.

Table 1. Characteristics of Bed Materials Used

Material properties Material I Material II
Average grain size 共mm兲 7.2 11
Grain size standard deviation 共mm兲 13 8.7
Specific gravity 共g / cm3兲 2.60 2.60
Angle of repose ␾ 共degrees兲 34.5° 35.5° Fig. 5. Material used in experiments

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006 / 1071

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.

 Fig. 6. Change of coefficient w by qo / qu 共Material I兲 Fig. 8. Change of coefficient w by qo / qu 共Materials I and II兲
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the experiment are presented in Fig. 5. After conducting experi-
ments with two types of materials, the relationship among grain
size, depth of scour, height of water at the outlet, total discharge,
and head has been investigated. The result is that scour is directly
proportional to head, h, and to discharge passing through a unit
width, q, and inversely proportional to grain size d.
The change of w values for Material I, Material II, and Mate-
rial I + Material II with respect to the ratio 共qo / qu兲 is considered
for the implementation of the TS fuzzy logic methodology so as
to depict the common behavior of these two variables. The fol-
lowing equation gives the result of the experimental work as:
h0.5q0.6
d0 + h1 = w 共4兲
d0.4
90
where d0⫽scour depth 共m兲; hl⫽downstream depth 共m兲; h⫽head
共m兲; q = qo⫹qu⫽discharge per unit length 共m3 / s / m兲; d90⫽granule
size of bed material 共mm兲, 共diameter in which 90% of the mate-
rial by weight goes through the screen兲; and w⫽coefficient. The
application is possible under the light of a set of assumptions
which includes linearity, normality, variance constancy, ergodic-
ity, and independence of the residuals. The TS fuzzy logic model
replaces Eq. 共5兲 without any of these restrictions and expresses a
natural relationship between qo / qu and w. On the other hand, the
regression model consists of two parts, namely parabolic and lin-
ear. Thus it is necessary to consider the transition region which
depends on the ratio 共qo / qu兲. However, the fuzzy logic model
does not contain such a transition region.
The system with four membership functions per input and four
rules is determined as the most suitable one after trial and error.
The input membership functions shown in Fig. 9 consist of “low,”
“medium,” “high,” and “very high” fuzzy subsets. The Gaussian
membership function provides a smaller relative error compared
to the other types and therefore is selected for the modeling. Table
3 indicates the fuzzy rule base of the system. The last column in
Table 3 shows the parameters of the output functions which has
the following form:

冉冊
coefficient w is calculated separately for each experiment. The
change of w values for Material I, Material II, and Material I ⫹ qo 1
wr = br0 + b 共6兲
Material II with respect to the ratio 共qo / qu兲 is shown, respectively, qu r
in Figs. 6–8. The given curves are obtained using the least where br⫽consequent parameters of the TS fuzzy model. The
squares method. The input variable is the ratio qo / qu and the comparison of the TS fuzzy model and RM can be achieved on
output variable is w. Uyumaz 共1988兲 expressed such an equation the basis of different error definitions and graphical representa-
as tions. Average relative error percentage 共AREP兲 is employed in

w=A 冉冊 冉冊
qo
qu
2
−B
qo
qu
+C
qo
qu
⬍2
this paper for numerical error comparisons which is defined as
follows:

冉冊
n
1
p
兩w pi − wmi兩
w=E
qo
+F
qo
ⱖ2 共5兲
共AREP兲i = 100 兺
n p i=I wmi
共7兲
qu qu
in which A, B, C, D, and E⫽coefficients. The application of such where w pi and wmi⫽predicted and measured values at point i. In
a model requires, prior to any prediction procedure, the parameter order to validate the TS fuzzy model, the data was divided into
estimations from the available data 共Table 2兲. Furthermore, its training and testing parts. For Material I, Material II, and Material
I + Material II 4, 8, and 15 points of the entire data were left for
validation, respectively, whereas 20, 21, and 41 data points that
are the rest of the data are employed for training.

Table 2. Values of Coefficients A, B, C, E, and F

qo qo
ⱕ2 ⱖ2
qu qu

Material number A B C E F
I 3.17 −6.62 10.63 0.35 8.8
I 1.63 −4.68 11.65 0.35 8.8
Fig. 7. Change of coefficient w by qo / qu 共Material II兲 I + II 2.10 −5.65 11.56 0.35 8.8

1072 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.

 Table 3. Fuzzy Rule II Base
Output

Input W
Rule number qo / qu br0 br1
Material I
1 Low −26.03 1.71
2 Medium −3.933 31.35
3 High −12.5 38.31
4 Very high −9.44 44.2
Material II
1 Low −25.03 10.93
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2 Medium −3.82 24.44

3 High 5.563 −5.005
4 Very high 2.512 1.022
Material I and II
1 Low −17.6 11.33
2 medium −3.469 16.19
3 high 0.65 8.235
4 Very high 43.63 −149.10

Table 4. Comparison of Fuzzy and Regression Model Results for

Material I
Relative error
Observation Prediction 共%兲

Fuzzy Fuzzy
Date qo / qu w Model Regression model Regression
Training 0.115 10.092 9.944 9.911 1.468 1.797
part 0.151 9.917 9.598 9.703 3.220 2.161
Fig. 9. Input membership functions for: 共a兲 Material I; 共b兲 Material 0.127 9.565 9.824 9.840 2.634 2.799
II; and 共c兲 Materials I + II 0.218 8.197 8.970 9.337 8.616 12.214
0.238 9.018 8.839 9.234 1.986 2.339
0.323 9.135 8.510 8.822 6.839 3.421
The overall prediction results for validation and training for 0.384 8.920 8.417 8.555 5.642 4.088
Material I are given in Table 4. As can seen from the table for the 0.428 7.571 8.390 8.377 9.756 9.625
observed w value of 8.803, which produces the highest relative 0.463 8.060 8.380 8.244 3.819 2.238
error for regression, the predictions by fuzzy and regression 0.483 8.588 8.373 8.172 2.507 4.843
model are 8.064 and 7.618, respectively. The maximum relative 0.670 8.803 8.064 7.618 8.398 13.466
errors for the fuzzy and regression model are 11.502 and 0.709 7.024 7.937 7.530 11.502 6.719
13.466, respectively. On the other hand, the R2 coefficient for 0.783 8.158 7.666 7.390 6.030 9.414
the performance relative to a naive baseline is defined as 0.931 7.024 7.203 7.214 2.490 2.639
R2 = 1 − 共mean-square-error兲 / 共variance of observations兲. R2 and 1.240 7.590 7.566 7.295 0.320 3.882
AREP values for Material I, Material II, and Material I + Material 1.530 7.767 7.760 7.922 0.089 1.957
II are presented in Table 5. On the basis of these error criteria, the 1.720 8.607 8.637 8.622 0.351 0.171
TS fuzzy model yields smaller prediction error and is, therefore, 1.840 9.780 9.749 9.182 0.317 6.119
recommended.
2.520 9.193 10.261 9.444 10.408 2.658
Fig. 10 indicates the observed and predicted w values for train-
2.690 10.249 10.010 9.742 2.332 4.952
ing. It is obvious that they follow each other very closely and on
Average 4.436 4.875
average the observed and predicted w values have almost the
same statistical parameters. Predictions are successful especially Validation 0.294 8.470 8.600 8.958 1.515 5.445
part 0.604 8.080 8.232 7.788 1.849 3.614
at low or high values and have a very high correlation with ob-
servations. A comparison is also made for validation in Fig. 11. 1.120 8.177 7.221 7.192 11.694 12.045
As can be seen from Table 4, in the majority of the predictions, 3.620 10.014 10.306a 10.067a 2.833 0.526
the TS fuzzy model relative error is lower than the RM prediction. Average 4.473 5.408
a
In Table 4, the AREP is also given as 4.436 and 4.875 for the Validation points that are extrapolated.

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006 / 1073

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.

 Table 5. Comparison of Fuzzy Model and Regression Model in Terms of
R2 and AREP Values for Training and Testing Data
Training Validation

FM RM FM RM
Material
2 2 2 2
number R AREP R AREP R AREP R AREP
I 0.73 4.44 0.70 4.99 0.68 4.47 0.60 5.41
II 0.66 5.61 0.59 6.21 0.48 5.15 0.26 6.11
I + II 0.61 6.45 0.53 6.86 0.50 5.99 0.49 6.03

training part for TS fuzzy model and RM approaches, respec-

tively. On average, the TS fuzzy model method has comparatively
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

smaller AREP than the RM approach. It can be argued at this

junction that even though a general look at the prediction results
共see Table 4兲 from the TS fuzzy model and RM approaches seem
to indicate the superiority of the former approach, an insight into
the results may present a different picture. For instance, in the 20
point predictions shown in Table 4, the prediction error in the RM
method is less than that in the TS fuzzy method in 8 points 共i.e.,
40% of the points兲 for training data. This point cannot be consid-
ered as valid without looking at other error criteria and graphical
methods for a comparison of the two approaches. On the other
hand, for the testing data, the TS fuzzy model also gives less
relative error than RM.

Fig. 11. Comparison of models for testing data for: 共a兲 Material I; 共b兲
Material II; and 共c兲 Materials I + II

After all the aforementioned numerical and graphical compari-

sons, the superiority of the TS fuzzy model is evident in the
prediction of scour downstream of a vertical gate.

Conclusions

In recent years, modern modeling techniques have made a

considerable contribution to data analysis and provide simpler
methods for mapping input variables to outputs. In this study,
experimental findings of scour downstream of a vertical gate are
evaluated by using soft modeling and computing techniques. The
TS Fuzzy model represents the relationship between variables
that are obtained as a result of experimental study with less rela-
tive error than regression analysis. The other advantage of the
fuzzy logic approach is that it does not contain transition regions
that depend on flow conditions. It would be better to use the fuzzy
model so as to avoid some basic assumptions included in the
regression technique.

Acknowledgments

The writers wish to sincerely thank Professor Dr. Zekai Şen for
Fig. 10. Comparison of models for: 共a兲 Material I; 共b兲 Material II; his helpful suggestions. They are also grateful to Ömer Beğendik
and 共c兲 Materials I + II who contributed to the improvement of this paper.

1074 / JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.

 Notation Carstens, M. R. 共1966兲. “Similarity laws for localized scour.” J. Hydraul.
Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 92共3兲, 13–36.
The following symbols are used in this paper: Chatterjee, S. S., Ghosh, S. N., and Chatterjee, M. 共1994兲. “Local scour
due to the submerged horizontal jet.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 120共8兲, 973–
A , a ⫽ coefficients;
992.
Ar ⫽ fuzzy set;
Chen, J. Q., Xi, Y. G., and Zhang, Z. J. 共1998兲. “A clustering algorithm
B , b ⫽ coefficients; for fuzzy model identification.” Fuzzy Sets Syst., 98, 319–329.
br0 , br1 ⫽ consequent part 共output function兲 parameters; Chin, T. C., and Qi, X. M. 共1998兲. “Genetic algorithms for learning the
C , c ⫽ coefficients; rule base of fuzzy logic controller.” Fuzzy Sets Syst., 97, 1–7.
dm ⫽ maximum depth of scour; Dey, S., and Barbhuiya, A. K. 共2004兲. “Clear-water scour at abutments in
d0 ⫽ depth of local scour; thinly armored beds.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 130共7兲, 622–634.
d90 ⫽ granule size of bed material; Dey, S., and Westrich, B. 共2002兲. “Hydraulics of submerged jet subject to
E , e ⫽ coefficients; change in cohesive bed geometry.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 129共1兲, 44–53.
F , f ⫽ coefficients; Farhoudi, J., and Smith, K. V. H. 共1982兲. “Time-scale for scour down-
f r共.兲 ⫽ function of input variables; stream of hydraulic jump.” J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng.,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

h ⫽ head of flow;
h1 ⫽ water depth at downstream;
i ⫽ data point;
m ⫽ coefficient;
mrk ⫽ ␣ cuts of membership functions;
n ⫽ number of fuzzy rules;
p ⫽ number of input variables;
q ⫽ discharge per unit length;
qo ⫽ discharge per unit length over gate;
qo / qu ⫽ ratio of discharge per unit length over and
under gate;
qu ⫽ discharge per unit length under gate;
Rr ⫽ rth rule;
Rr ⫽ occurrences probability;
R2 ⫽ correlation coefficient;
r ⫽ rule number;
rr ⫽ weight of rth inference rule;
t ⫽ time;
V ⫽ volume of scour hole;
w ⫽ coefficient;
wmi ⫽ measured values in point i;
w pi ⫽ predicted values in point i;
wr ⫽ output value of coefficient for rth rule;
x1, x2, x p ⫽ input variables;
y r ⫽ output of rth inference rule;
␣ ⫽ membership function truncation level;
⌳ ⫽ minimum operator; and
␹2 ⫽ chi-square value.
References
Altunkaynak, A. Özger, M., and Çakmakcl, M. 共2004a兲. “Water con-
sumption prediction of Istanbul city by using fuzzy logic approach.”
Water Resour. Manage., 19共5兲, 641–654.
Altunkaynak, A., Özger, M., and Çakmakcl, M. 共2004b兲. “Fuzzy logic
modeling of the dissolved oxygen fluctuations in golden horn.” Ecol.
Modell., 189共3–4兲, 436–446.
Bardossy, A., and Disse, M. 共1993兲. “Fuzzy rule based models for infil-
tration.” Water Resour. Res., 29共2兲, 373–382.
Breuser, H. N. C. 共1966兲. “Conformity and time scale in two-dimensional
local scour.” Proc., Symp. on Model and Prototype Conformity, Hy-
draulics Research Laboratory, Poona, India, 1–8.
Breuser, H. N. C. 共1967兲. “Time scale of two-dimensional local scour.”
Proc., 12th Congress, International Association for Hydraulic Re-
search, Fort Collins, Colo., C32-1–C32-8.
108共10兲, 1147–1162.
Jang, J. S. R. 共1993兲. “ANFIS: Adaptive network based fuzzy inference
system.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 23共3兲, 665–684.
Johnson, P. A., and Ayyub, B. M. 共1996兲. “Modeling uncertainty in pre-
diction of pier scour.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 122共2兲, 66–72.
Kindler, J. 共1992兲. “Rationalizing water requirements with aid of fuzzy
allocation model.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 118共3兲, 308–323.
Laursen, E. M. 共1952兲. “Observations on the nature of scour.” Proc., 5th
Hydraulics Conf., State Univ. of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, Bulletin
Number No. 34, 179–197.
Mamdani, E. H. 共1974兲. “Application of fuzzy algorithms for simple
dynamic plant.” Proc. IEEE, 121, 1585–1588.
Mohamed, M. S., and McCorquodale, J. A. 共1992兲. “Short-term local
scour.” J. Hydraul. Res., 30共5兲, 685–699.
Pappis, C. P., and Mamdani, E. H. 共1977兲. “A fuzzy controller for a traffic
junction.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 7共10兲, 707–717.
Pongracz, R., Bogardi, I., and Duckstein, L. 共1999兲. “Application of
fuzzy rule-based modeling technique to regional drought.” J. Hydrol.,
224共3–4兲, 100–114.
Ross, J. T. 共1995兲. Fuzzy logic with engineering applications, McGraw-
Hill, New York.
Sarma, K. V. N. 共1971兲. “Discussion of similarity laws for localized
scour.” J. Hydraul. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 93共2兲, 67–71.
Şen, Z. 共2004兲. Fuzzy logic and system models in water sciences, Turkish
Water Foundation, Istanbul, Turkey.
Şen, Z., and Altunkaynak, A. 共2004兲. “Fuzzy awakening in rainfall-runoff
modeling.” Nord. Hydrol., 35共1兲, 31–43.
Şen, Z., Altunkaynak, A., and Özger, M. 共2003兲. “Autorun persistence of
hydrologic design.” J. Hydrologic Eng., 8共6兲, 329–338.
Şen, Z., Altunkaynak, A., and Özger, M. 共2004兲. “Sediment concentration
and its prediction by perceptron Kalman filtering procedure.” J. Hy-
draul. Eng., 130共8兲, 816–826.
Shrestha, B. P., Duckstein, L., and Stakhiv, E. Z. 共1996兲. “Fuzzy rule-
based modeling of reservoir operation.” J. Water Resour. Plan. Man-
age., 122共4兲, 262–269.
Stoeva, S., and Nikov, A. 共2000兲. “A fuzzy backpropagation algorithm.”
Fuzzy Sets Syst., 112, 27–39.
Takagi, T., and Sugeno, M. 共1985兲. “Fuzzy identification of systems and
its application to modeling and control.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cy-
bern., 15, 116–132.
Tusuchiya, Y., and Iwagaki, Y. 共1967兲. “On the mechanism of the local
scour from flows downstream of an outlet.” Proc., 12th Int. Associa-
tion of Hydraulics Research, 12th Congress, Fort Collins, Colo.
Uyumaz, A. 共1988兲. “Scour downstream of vertical gate.” J. Hydraul.
Eng., 114, 811–816.
Xiong, L., Shamseldin, A. Y., and O’Connor, M. K. 共2001兲. “A nonlinear
combination of the forecasts of rainfall-runoff models by the first
order Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy system.” J. Hydrol., 245, 196–217.
Zadeh, L. A. 共1965兲. “Fuzzy sets.” Information and Control, 12, 94–102.

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING © ASCE / OCTOBER 2006 / 1075

J. Hydraul. Eng. 2006.132:1069-1075.