4.7 Article

Flow resistance in steep streams: An experimental study

期刊

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2009WR007913

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. Province of British Columbia/Ministry of Postsecondary Education
  3. University of British Columbia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Frequently, an assessment of the mean water velocity in a stream is necessary to estimate the discharge associated with a particular flow depth or, conversely, the mean depth associated with a particular discharge. In the absence of a direct measurement of flow velocity, a flow resistance approach, which establishes the relation between depth and velocity, can be applied. Two approaches have been used in the past: traditional approaches based on the use of a resistance coefficient (e. g., Darcy-Weisbach) or dimensionless hydraulic geometry approaches. To examine if one approach is more appropriate for steep streams, data from 31 flume experiments conducted to examine flow resistance in self-formed cascade channels were analyzed. A dimensionless hydraulic geometry approach developed using at-a-station data to characterize the q* exponent and between-site data to characterize the exponent on the channel slope term was more accurate than more traditional approaches. The developed relation was similar to the established rational relation (v alpha g(0.2)q(0.6)s(-0.4)S(0.2)), suggesting that the rational relation has merit. The approach does not utilize a flow partitioning approach since, in steep streams with small relative depths, the grains themselves generate form and spill resistance. The observation that a single dimensionless hydraulic geometry flow resistance relation can describe measurements across a range of grain sizes and bed slopes (3-21%) suggests that steep streams may follow a single scaling relation similar to the regime equations associated with lowland rivers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据