Comparisons between unsteady sediment-transport modeling

Abstract

The comparative study between unsteady flow models in alluvial streams shows a chaotic residue as for the choices of a forecasting model. The difficulty resides in the choice of the expressions of friction resistance and sediment transport. Three types of mathematical models were selected. Models of type one and two are fairly general, but require a considerable number of boundary conditions, which related to each size range of sediments. It can be a handicap during rivers studies which are not very well followed in terms of experimental measurements. Also, the use of complex models is not always founded. But then, the model of type three requires a limited number of boundary conditions and solves only a system of three equations at each time step. It allows a considerable saving in calculating times.

Keywords

friction resistance / bed load / suspended load / mobile-bed modeling

References

[1] HuangS. L.. Effect of using different sediment transport formulae and method of computing Manning’s roughness coefficient on numerical modelling of sediment transport [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2007, 45(3): 347-356

[2] PapanicolaouA., BdourA., WickleinE.. One-dimensional hydrodynamic/sediment transport model applicable to steep mountain streams [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2004, 42(4): 357-375

[3] BurgueteJ., Garcia-navarroP., MurilloJ., Garcia-palacinI.. Analysis of the friction term in the One-dimensional shallow-Water model [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2007, 133(9): 1048-1063

[4] HuS., AbrahamsA. D.. The effect of bed mobility on resistance to overland low [J]. Earth Surf Process, Landforms, 2005, 30: 1461-1470

[5] MorvanH., KnightD., WrightN., TangX., CrossleyA.. The concept of roughness in fluvial hydraulics and its formulation in 1D, 2D and 3D numerical simulation models [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2008, 46(2): 191-208

[6] Ben SlamaE., PeronS., BelleudryP.. TSAR: One-dimensional simulation of degradation of alluvial channel beds [C]. Hydrotechnical Symposium, Session No. 148, 1993FranceHydrotechnical Society

[7] BOTCHEVA M M, IOCHEVA V D. Applicability of bed-load sediment formulas to natural Bulgarian river flows [R]. 21 ème Congress AIRH, Canada, 1989: B331–B337.

[8] RahuelJ. L., HollyF. M., CholletJ. P., BelleudryP. J., YangG.. Modeling of riverbed evolution for bedload sediment mixtures [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 1989, 115(11): 1521-1542

[9] KarimM. F., KennedyJ. F.Computer-based predictors for sediment discharge and friction factor of alluvial streams [R], 1981USAUniversity of Iowa City

[10] YangG.Modeling of riverbed evolution for sediment mixtures [D], 1989Grenoble I, FranceUniversity Joseph Fourrier

[11] CorreiaL. R. P., KrishappanB. G., GrafW. H.. Fully coupled mobile boundary [J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 1992, 118(3): 476-794