[1] Recent advances in technology have revolutionized the acquisition of topographic data, offering new perspectives on the structure and morphology of the Earth's surface. These developments have had a profound impact on the practice of river science, creating a step change in the dimensionality, resolution, and precision of fluvial terrain models. The emergence of ''hyperscale'' survey methods, including structure from motion photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning (TLS), now presents the opportunity to acquire 3-D point cloud data that capture grain-scale detail over reach-scale extents. Translating these data into geomorphologically relevant products is, however, not straightforward. Unlike traditional survey methods, TLS acquires observations rapidly and automatically, but unselectively. This results in considerable ''noise'' associated with backscatter from vegetation and other artifacts. Moreover, the large data volumes are difficult to visualize; require very high capacity storage; and are not incorporated readily into GIS and simulation models. In this paper we analyze the geomorphological integrity of multiscale terrain models rendered from a TLS survey of the braided River Feshie, Scotland. These raster terrain models are generated using a new, computationally efficient geospatial toolkit: the topographic point cloud analysis toolkit (ToPCAT). This performs an intelligent decimation of point cloud data into a set of 2.5-D terrain models that retain information on the high-frequency subgrid topography, as the moments of the locally detrended elevation distribution. The results quantify the degree of terrain generalization inherent in conventional fluvial DEMs and illustrate how subgrid topographic statistics can be used to map the spatial pattern of particle size, grain roughness, and sedimentary facies at the reach scale.Citation: Brasington, J., D. Vericat, and I. Rychkov (2012), Modeling river bed morphology, roughness, and surface sedimentology using high resolution terrestrial laser scanning, Water Resour. Res., 48, W11519,
In the last decade advances in surveying technology have opened up the possibility of representing topography and monitoring surface changes over experimental plots (<10 m2) in high resolution (~103 points m‐1). Yet the representativeness of these small plots is limited. With ‘Structure‐from‐Motion’ (SfM) and ‘Multi‐View Stereo’ (MVS) techniques now becoming part of the geomorphologist's toolkit, there is potential to expand further the scale at which we characterise topography and monitor geomorphic change morphometrically. Moving beyond previous plot‐scale work using Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS) surveys, this paper validates robustly a number of SfM‐MVS surveys against total station and extensive TLS data at three nested scales: plots (<30 m2) within a small catchment (4710 m2) within an eroding marl badland landscape (~1 km2). SfM surveys from a number of platforms are evaluated based on: (i) topography; (ii) sub‐grid roughness; and (iii) change‐detection capabilities at an annual scale. Oblique ground‐based images can provide a high‐quality surface equivalent to TLS at the plot scale, but become unreliable over larger areas of complex terrain. Degradation of surface quality with range is observed clearly for SfM models derived from aerial imagery. Recently modelled ‘doming’ effects from the use of vertical imagery are proven empirically as a piloted gyrocopter survey at 50m altitude with convergent off‐nadir imagery provided higher quality data than an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) flying at the same height and collecting vertical imagery. For soil erosion monitoring, SfM can provide data comparable with TLS only from small survey ranges (~5 m) and is best limited to survey ranges ~10–20 m. Synthesis of these results with existing validation studies shows a clear degradation of root‐mean squared error (RMSE) with survey range, with a median ratio between RMSE and survey range of 1:639, and highlights the effect of the validation method (e.g. point‐cloud or raster‐based) on the estimated quality. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Indices of connectivity are critical means for moving from qualitative to (semi-)quantitative evaluations of material (e.g., water, sediment and nutrients) transfer across the building blocks of a terrestrial system. In geomorphology, compared to closely related disciplines like ecology and hydrology, the development of indices has only recently started and as such presents opportunities and challenges that merit attention. In this paper, we review existing indices of sediment connectivity and suggest potential avenues of development for meeting current basic and applied research needs. Specifically, we focus on terrestrial geomorphic systems dominated by processes that are driven by hydro-meteorological forcing, neglecting seismically triggered events, karstic systems and environments controlled by eolian processes. We begin by setting a conceptual framework that combines external forcings (drivers) and system (intrinsic) structural and functional properties relevant to sediment connectivity. This framework guides our review of response variables suitable for sediment connectivity indices. In particular, we consider three sample applications concerned with sediment connectivity in: (i) soil studies at the plot scale, (ii) bedload transport at the reach scale, and (iii) sediment budgets at the catchment scale. In relation to the set of response variables identified, we consider data availability and issues of data acquisition for use in indices of sediment connectivity. We classify currently available indices in raster based, object or network based, and indices based on effective catchment area. Virtually all existing indices address the degree of static, structural connectivity only, with limited attention for process-based, functional connectivity counterparts.
[1] Previous flume-based research on braided channels has revealed four classic mechanisms that produce braiding: central bar development, chute cutoff, lobe dissection, and transverse bar conversion. The importance of these braiding mechanisms relative to other morphodynamic mechanisms in shaping braided rivers has not yet been investigated in the field. Here we exploit repeat topographic surveys of the braided River Feshie (UK) to explore the morphodynamic signatures of different mechanisms of change in sediment storage. Our results indicate that, when combined, the four classic braiding mechanisms do indeed account for the majority of volumetric change in storage in the study reach (61% total). Chute cutoff, traditionally thought of as an erosional braiding mechanism, appears to be the most common braiding mechanism in the study river, but was more the result of deposition during the construction of diagonal bars than it was the erosion of the chute. Three of the four classic mechanisms appeared to be largely net aggradational in nature, whereas secondary mechanisms (including bank erosion, channel incision, and bar sculpting) were primarily net erosional. Although the role of readily erodible banks in facilitating braiding is often conceptualized, we show that bank erosion is as or more important a mechanism in changes in sediment storage than most of the braiding mechanisms, and is the most important "secondary" mechanism (17% of total change). The results of this study provide one of the first field tests of the relative importance of braiding mechanisms observed in flume settings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.