Comparison of Calibrated Empirical and Semi-Empirical Methods for Bedload Transport Rate Prediction in Gravel Bed Streams

Hinton, Darren; Hotchkiss, Rollin H.; Cope, Michael

doi:10.1061/(asce)hy.1943-7900.0001474

Cited by 21 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A hybrid equation proposed by Recking (2013) links a 5/2 power high-θ asymptote with a 6.5 power low-θ asymptote and takes account of the effects of slope and bed sorting on θ c . It outperformed several better-known equations in a test by Hinton et al (2018). What do measurements of bed-material transport in rivers show?…”

Section: Bed-materials Fluxmentioning

confidence: 95%

Limits to scale invariance in alluvial rivers

Ferguson

2020

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assumptions about fluvial processes and process–form relations are made in general models and in many site‐specific applications. Many standard assumptions about reach‐scale flow resistance, bed‐material entrainment thresholds and transport rates, and downstream hydraulic geometry involve one or other of two types of scale invariance: a parameter (e.g. critical Shields number) has the same value in all rivers, or doubling one variable causes a fixed proportional change in another variable in all circumstances (e.g. power‐law hydraulic geometry). However, rivers vary greatly in size, gradient, and bed material, and many geomorphologists regard particular types of river as distinctive. This review examines the tension between universal scaling assumptions and perceived distinctions between different types of river. It identifies limits to scale invariance and departures from simple scaling, and illustrates them using large data sets spanning a wide range of conditions. Scaling considerations and data analysis support the commonly made distinction between coarse‐bed and fine‐bed reaches, whose different transport regimes can be traced to the different settling‐velocity scalings for coarse and fine grains. They also help identify two end‐member sub‐types: steep shallow coarse‐bed ‘torrents’ with distinctive flow‐resistance scaling and increased entrainment threshold, and very large, low‐gradient ‘mega rivers’ with predominantly suspended load, subdued secondary circulation, and extensive backwater conditions. © 2020 The Authors. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

show abstract

Section: Bed-materials Fluxmentioning

confidence: 95%

Limits to scale invariance in alluvial rivers

Ferguson

2020

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this paper, we decided to use Reckin Recking et al, 2016), since this equation has been tested and validated against bedload discharge information from natural gravel-bed rivers (e.g. Hinton et al, 2018). Recking (2013b) proposed the following expression for bedload rates:…”

Section: S 2 a Simple Model For Armour Ratios Based On Bedload Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Parker, 2004;Recking, 2010;Camenen et al, 2011;Vázquez-Tarrío and Menéndez-Duarte, 2015;Hinton et al, 2018). In this paper, based on 3) (afterRecking et al, 2016) bedload equation, the following expressions are obtained (see details in the supplementary information)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Textural signatures of sediment supply in gravel-bed rivers: Revisiting the armour ratio

Vázquez‐Tarrío

Piégay

Menéndez-Duarte

2020

Earth-Science Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The surface of the streambed in gravel-bed rivers is commonly coarser than the underlying bed material. This surface coarsening, or 'armouring', is usually described by means of the ratio between surface and subsurface grain-size metrics (the 'armour ratio'). Such surface coarsening is typical of river reaches that are degrading due to a deficit in sediment supply (e.g. gravel-bed reaches below dams or lakes), but non-degrading gravel-bed streams may also exhibit some degree of armouring in relation to specific hydrological patterns. For instance, selective transport during the recession limbs of long lasting floods may coarsen the bed more significantly than flash floods. Consequently, regional differences in bed coarsening should exist, reflecting in turn the variability in sediment and water regimes. In this paper, we explore the trends linking armour ratios to sediment supply, taking into account the differences in hydrological context. We based our analysis on a large data set of bedload and grain size measurements from 49 natural gravelbed streams and four flume experiments compiled from the scientific literature. Our main outcome documents how the balances between sediment yields and transport capacities have a quantifiable reflection on the armour ratios measured in the field: we report strong and statistically significant correlations between bedload fluxes and surface grain-size, and an asymptotic rise in armour ratios with the decline of sediment supply. Hydrological controls are also observed, but they are small compared to the signal related to sediment supply. Additionally, the trends observed in the field data are comparable to those previously documented in flume experiments with varying sediment feed. In this regard, different kinds of bedforms and particle arrangements have been commonly described with progressive reductions in sediment inputs and the subsequent coarsening of the streambed. Hence, armour ratios serve as a proxy for the general organization of the streambed of gravel-bed streams, and our results quantify this streambed adjustment to the dominant sediment supply regime.

show abstract

“…where T 0 and T f are the departure and final times of the study period (respectively), qs T is the bed load rate at each time step T, and pp iT is the proportion of the i-size class in the bed load. Bed load rates were estimated using Recking's (2013) [63] sediment transport equation, which appears to work well in coarse-bed rivers with the same range of slope and bed conditions as the River Esva [63,64]. Once we computed V i for the different size classes, we calculated the percentage of each size class in the total bed load volumes (V T ) mobilized during the study period:…”

Section: Modelling Streambed Mobility In the River Esvamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both issues help explain why the GSD of the time integrated bed load is finer than the GSD of the sub-armour sediment, although some potential methodological bias cannot be neglected. We defined the GSD of the time integrated bed load based on bed load rates computed using [63] (updated by Recking et al (2016) [70]) bed load equation, which is said to perform well in gravel-bed rivers [64]. However, at low flows, fine sediment exhaustion from the riverbed surface can give rise to a supply-limited situation, compromising the applicability of bed load formulae.…”

Section: Gsd Of the Bed Load And The Streambed Sediment: Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying the Variability in Flow Competence and Streambed Mobility with Water Discharge in a Gravel-Bed Channel: River Esva, NW Spain

Vázquez‐Tarrío

Fernandez-Iglesias

García

et al. 2019

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Streambed mobility in gravel-bed rivers is largely controlled by the rate at which particles with different grain sizes are recruited from the riverbed into the bed load. In this paper, we present a study case in which we explored this question, based on combining field observations using painted plots and the grain size analysis of a large flood sediment deposit in the River Esva, northwest Spain, and the generalized threshold model (GTM) competence model developed by Recking. The main aim was to accomplish a complete characterization of streambed mobility in this river. The obtained results suggest the large potential of the GTM model compared to previous competence models when searching for the quantitative description of particle entrainment and streambed mobility in the River Esva. We observed how the grain size of the bed load in the River Esva tended to be closer to that of the sub-armour bed material during large floods, while moderate magnitude flows tended to carry a relatively fine bed load. Additionally, we compared our results with previously published field observations on flow competence. This comparison outlined the large degree of site specificity in the links between grain size of the bed load and that of the bed material.

show abstract

Comparison of Calibrated Empirical and Semi-Empirical Methods for Bedload Transport Rate Prediction in Gravel Bed Streams

Cited by 21 publications

References 34 publications

Limits to scale invariance in alluvial rivers

Limits to scale invariance in alluvial rivers

Textural signatures of sediment supply in gravel-bed rivers: Revisiting the armour ratio

Quantifying the Variability in Flow Competence and Streambed Mobility with Water Discharge in a Gravel-Bed Channel: River Esva, NW Spain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About