Evaluating lateral riverbank erosion with sediment yield through integrated model in lower Gangetic floodplain, India

Ghosh, Arnab; Roy, Malabika Biswas; Roy, Pankaj Kumar

doi:10.1007/s11600-022-00822-7

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Equation () shows that the hydraulic radius is jointly affected by the cross‐sectional area and wet perimeter, which vary with the water stage. Ghosh et al (2022) coupled the BSTEM and HEC‐RAS software and found that the boundary shear stress was linearly related to the water stage with a fitting error of R 2 = 0.8059. Therefore, a well‐done time step division plan should be able to reflect the correlation between boundary shear stress and water stage.…”

Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similar to previous studies (Duan et al, 2018; Ghosh et al, 2022; Zong et al, 2017), we used the MTT in the iterative operation to align the profile with reality. However, the BSTEM automatically uses the 17th node, Q, as the DTT.…”

Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, we compared the difference between using and not using the default TT. Although other researchers did not consider TT selection, most selected MTT instead of DTT (e.g., Duan et al, 2018; Ghosh et al, 2022; Zong et al, 2017), as seen from their bank profiles. Adopting DTT in the BSTEM produces a larger failure width than the measured values because DTT causes chaos in the distribution of nodes, such as nodes falling into the riverbed or showing a direction opposite that of the bank's retreat, which is inconsistent with the actual situation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Refining the Bank Stability and Toe Erosion Model: Improving the timestep, the top of toe selection and the iteration routine

Niu²,

You

2023

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Riverbank failure is an essential source of river sediment and a major cause of river meandering. The Bank Stability and Toe Erosion Model (BSTEM) is a widely used simulation tool owing to its simplicity and clear presentation of results. However, the three core issues in the simulation by the software, time‐step determination, top‐of‐toe (TT) selection, and the iterative algorithm, still lack an in‐depth discussion to ensure the rationality and stability of the simulation results. In this study, the Jing‐150 cross‐section of the Jingjiang River was chosen as an example to illustrate these three problems. For the first problem, which is the choice of the time step, the simulation results become stable and close to the measured value as the time‐step decreases. After determining a suitable time step, the difference between adopting and modifying the default TT of the BSTEM was analysed. The results show that adopting the default TT causes chaos in the distribution of profile nodes, leading to an overly large bank failure width, whereas the modified TT node distribution is normal and the bank failure width is close to the measured value. For the third problem, the original iteration routine (OR) may cause the output bank profile to be unstable and cause a deviation between the bank width and measured value. The negative impact of unstable bank profiles diminishes as the time‐step decreases. However, the workload for reducing the time step is enormous. Therefore, an improved routine (IR) was proposed. With IR, the relative error between the simulated and measured values of the failure width was within 15% when the SD of the water stage was reduced to 0.2478. A similar result could only be obtained when the SD of the water stage was less than 0.099 for OR. This means that to obtain the same simulation accuracy for the failure width, IR can use a larger time step than OR, thereby reducing the workload of the simulation.

show abstract

Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%