World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2018
Numerical Investigation of the Effect of River Modeling Parameters on Bed Shear Stress
Publication: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2018: Hydraulics and Waterways, Water Distribution Systems Analysis, and Smart Water
ABSTRACT
In the design of stream restorations, boundary shear stress (shear stress) during high flow events is one of the key parameters in the assessment of the risk of morphological failure associated with channel bed and bank erosion and sediment transport. The use of two-dimensional hydrodynamic models (2D models) is becoming more common to estimate shear stress for stream restorations. These models can provide detailed distribution of shear stress over channels and floodplain surfaces. Obtaining accurate and reliable estimates of stress requires an accurate digital terrain model, estimates of input flows, and surface roughness coefficients. Impediments to the use of these models include the cost associated with extensively detailed terrain surveys, distributed information about the roughness coefficients, and the determination of appropriate flow conditions that must be modeled to identify erosion susceptible components. In the present research, the two-dimensional hydrodynamic model TUFLOW is employed to assess the sensitivity of shear stress to flow magnitude, upstream extent of the model, and roughness coefficients. Topography and hydraulic data obtained from monitoring efforts of the restored channel and floodplain of Slabcamp Creek located in Rowan County, Kentucky, was used to develop and calibrate the 2D model. Flow magnitude, the location of the upstream inflow boundary condition, and the roughness coefficients were varied to determine the sensitivity of the shear stress at a critical location in the restoration. The shear stress analysis was conducted along cross sections located in areas identified as being potentially at risk for high shear stress. The shear stress distribution was found to be relatively insensitive to the location of the upstream boundary condition and most sensitive to the flow and roughness coefficients of the floodplain. An interesting observation was that the shear stress in the channel decreased with the increased roughness of the floodplain.
Get full access to this chapter
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCE
1.
O. E. Sala, F. Stuart Chapin, III, J. J. Armesto, E. Berlow, J. Bloomfield, R. Dirzo, E. Huber-Sanwald, L. F. Huenneke, R. B. Jackson, A. Kinzig, R. Leemans, D. M. Lodge, H. A. Mooney, M.N. Oesterheld, N. L. Poff, M. T. Sykes, B. H. Walker, M. Walker, D. H. Wall, Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100, Science 287(5459) (2000) 1770–1774.
2.
J. B. Kauffman, R. L. Beschta, N. Otting, D. Lytjen, An Ecological Perspective of Riparian and Stream Restoration in the Western United States, Fisheries 22(5) (1997) 12–24.
3.
A. G. Brown, Learning from the past: palaeohydrology and palaeoecology, Freshwater Biology 47(4) (2002) 817–829.
4.
S. J. Bennett, A. Simon, J. M. Castro, J. F. Atkinson, C. E. Bronner, S. S. Blersch, A. J. Rabideau, The Evolving Science of Stream Restoration, Stream Restoration in Dynamic Fluvial Systems, American Geophysical Union 2013, pp. 1–8.
5.
M. A. Palmer, E. S. Bernhardt, J. D. Allan, P. S. Lake, G. Alexander, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S. Clayton, C. N. Dahm, J. Follstad Shah, D. L. Galat, S. G. Loss, P. Goodwin, D. D. Hart, B. Hassett, R. Jenkinson, G. M. Kondolf, R. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O'Donnell, L. Pagano, E. Sudduth, Standards for ecologically successful river restoration, Journal of Applied Ecology 42(2) (2005) 208–217.
6.
E. S. Bernhardt, M. A. Palmer, J. D. Allan, G. Alexander, K. Barnas, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S. Clayton, C. Dahm, J. Follstad-Shah, D. Galat, S. Gloss, P. Goodwin, D. Hart, B. Hassett, R. Jenkinson, S. Katz, G. M. Kondolf, P. S. Lake, R. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O'Donnell, L. Pagano, B. Powell, E. Sudduth, Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts, Science 308(5722) (2005) 636–637.
7.
D. Dudgeon, A. H. Arthington, M. O. Gessner, Z. Kawabata, D. J. Knowler, C. Leveque, R. J. Naiman, A. H. Prieur-Richard, D. Soto, M. L. Stiassny, C. A. Sullivan, Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 81(2) (2006) 163–82.
8.
G. M. Kondolf, Five Elements for Effective Evaluation of Stream Restoration, Restoration Ecology 3(2) (1995) 133–136.
9.
C. A. Frissell, R. K. Nawa, Incidence and Causes of Physical Failure of Artificial Habitat Structures in Streams of Western Oregon and Washington, North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12(1) (1992) 182–197.
10.
G. M. Kondolf, M. W. Smeltzer, S. F. Railsback, Design and performance of a channel reconstruction project in a coastal California gravel-bed stream, Environmental management 28(6) (2001) 761–76.
11.
D. Harper, Watershed Restoration: Principles and Practices. Edited by J. E. Williams, C. A. Wood and M. P. Dombeck, Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 9(1) (1999) 122–123.
12.
J. R. Miller, R. Craig Kochel, Assessment of channel dynamics, in-stream structures and post-project channel adjustments in North Carolina and its implications to effective stream restoration, Environmental Earth Sciences 59(8) (2010) 1681–1692.
13.
P. A. Johnson, E. R. Brown, INCORPORATING UNCERTAINTY IN THE DESIGN OF STREAM CHMNEL MODIFICATIONS1, JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37(5) (2001) 1225–1236.
14.
B. P. Buchanan, M. T. Walter, G. N. Nagle, R. L. Schneider, Monitoring and assessment of a river restoration project in central New York, River Research and Applications 28(2) (2012) 216–233.
15.
L. B. Leopold, M. G. Wolman, J. P. Miller, Fluvial processes in geomorphology, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, NY, 1964.
16.
J. Arthur C. Parola, Michael A. Croasdaile, W. S. V. Ward Oberholtzer, Storing Sediment in a Coastal Plain Valley Plug: Obion Creek Stream Restoration, World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2008 2008.
17.
G. S. Stelling, On the construction of computational methods for shallow water flow problems, Applied Sciences, Netherlands:, 1983.
18.
N. M. Hunter, P. D. Bates, M. S. Horritt, M. D. Wilson, Simple spatially-distributed models for predicting flood inundation: A review, Geomorphology 90(3) (2007) 208–225.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2018: Hydraulics and Waterways, Water Distribution Systems Analysis, and Smart Water
Pages: 169 - 175
Editor: Sri Kamojjala, Las Vegas Valley Water District
ISBN (Online): 978-0-7844-8142-4
Copyright
© 2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: May 31, 2018
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.