SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

NEES-Pile: Experimental and Computational Study of Pile Foundations Subjected to Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading COMPARISON BETWEEN CENTRIFUGE.

Advertisements

Drag and Momentum Balance

Process Geomorphology 9/20/2011. Pattern to Process, Process to Pattern.

The Global Hydrological Cycle

The effect of raindrop impacted flow on sediment composition.

Lecture 4 Alluvial fans.

Recap Rivers Rivers work hard. They are always E________ and moving this material downstream (T __________). Rivers are eroding down the way and across.

Soils of Wisconsin Topic C. Soil Uncemented aggregate of mineral grains and decayed organic matter with liquid and gas in the empty spaces between the.

Runoff Processes Slides from Venkatesh Merwade and Suzanne Anderson Reading: Applied Hydrology Sections 5.1 and 5.2.

Upper and lower limits on the stability of calving glaciers from the yield strength envelope of ice by J. N. Bassis, and C. C. Walker Proceedings A Volume.

Preferential transport of carbon materials in rain-impacted flow in rain-impacted flow Peter Kinnell University of Canberra Australia.

Development of River Systems Earth Science Grade 8.

Development of River Systems Earth Science Grade 8.

Process Geomorphology. 10/13 Objectives Learning Objective: Understand the concepts of driving and resisting forces, and constitutive equations in geomorphologic.

Head Dependent Boundaries

STREAMS AND GROUND WATER. MASS WASTING Meandering Stream Profile Figure

Long-term Continuous GIS-based Modeling of Forest Land Use Changes in Mica Creek Watershed in Northern Idaho Jan Boll Erin Brooks Bio. and Ag. Eng. Dept.

The Marssim Model The skeleton is a pretty generic landform evolution model: – Weathering – Non-linear diffusive creep – Bedrock channels erosion by any.

27 June 2015GLG510 Advanced Structural Geology Faults and stress.

Conference Call Summary Three solids classes –Clay settles at 5 m/d –Silt settles at 50 m/d –Sand settles at 1000 m/d Major recommendation was use formulae.

River morphology and process class 1.consider physics of flow and erosion 2.review river taxonomy 3.examine the germane processes that control the shape.

Suspended Load Above certain critical shear stress conditions, sediment particles are maintained in suspension by the exchange of momentum from the fluid.

How to show what you know Solve problems or answer questions related to: - Fourier’s Law of heat conduction - Lithostatic pressure gradients - Isostasy.

Field Methodologies: Detailed Investigation Andrew Simon USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS

Update on the HEC-RAS Reservoir Transport Simulation Mike Langland and Ed Koerkle 03/30/2012.

Methods A predictive method will be developed from NBSS measurements and vegetation/channel properties from the flume data. The predictive method will.

Bank-Stability and Toe-Erosion Model Andrew Simon, Andrea Curini, Eddy Langendoen, and Robert Thomas USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford,

Formulation of a New Breach Model for Embankments IMPACT Project Workshop, Wallingford 2002 Breach Formation Theme.

Fluvial Geomorphic Analyses of the Llano River and Sandy Creek Basins, Central Texas, using GIS and Arc Hydro Tools Franklin T. Heitmuller CE 394K November.

Sensitivity analysis of hydraulic model to morphological changes and changes in flood inundation extent J.S. Wong 1, J. Freer 1, P.D. Bates 1, & D.A. Sear.

US Army Corps of Engineers Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory Engineer Research and Development Center Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment SedFlume.

A Deterministic Bank-Stability and Toe-Erosion Model (BSTEM Version 5.4) Andrew Simon, Robert Thomas, Andrea Curini and Natasha Bankhead USDA-ARS National.

Importance of unique events/thresholds Discrete vs. continuous processes Storms Disturbance Landslides Debris Flows.

Development, Testing and Application of the Multi-Block LTFATE Hydrodynamic and Sediment Transport Model Earl J. Hayter See instructions for customizing.

Learning objectives To understand why the Hjulstrom curve is a logarithmic graph To interpret the Hjulstrom curve.

Environmental Hydrodynamics Lab. Yonsei University, KOREA RCEM D finite element modeling of bed elevation change in a curved channel S.-U. Choi,

Quantifying Reductions of Mass- Failure Frequency and Sediment Loadings from Streambanks using Toe Protection and Other Means Andrew Simon, Natasha Pollen-Bankhead,

Controls on sediment availability on the continental shelf and implications for rates of morphologic evolution Patricia Wiberg University of Virginia with.

Lecture Objectives Review wall functions Discuss: Project 1, HW2, and HW3 Project topics.

Constraining Spatial Variability in Erosion Rates.

سایت جامع دانشجویان و مهندسین عمران Footing Design

Carding Mill Valley – The River Long Mynd

Date of download: 10/18/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.

continued on next slide

LARGE EDDY SIMILATIONS OF FULLY DEVELOPED TURBULENT CHANNEL FLOW

Tips Need to Consider When Organizing a College Event

continued on next slide

continued on next slide

Numerical Study of the Wall Slip Reduction Effects for a Double Concentric Cylinder Rheometer with Slotted Rotor D. De Kee, Department of Chemical and.

Physics-based simulation for visual computing applications

ماجستير إدارة المعارض من بريطانيا

التعامل مع ضغوطات العمل إعداد وتقديم إقبال المطيري

Numerical Modeling of Fluid Droplet Spreading and Contact Angle Hysteresis Nikolai V. Priezjev, Mechanical Engineering, Michigan State University, MI

Fluvial Systems, a. k. a. Rivers, a. k. a

Mass Movements/ Wasting

Development of River Systems

Today’s Lecture Objectives:

Review: overland water erosion

Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment

Instituto Superior Técnico instituto superior técnico

Fluvial Hydraulics CH-3

12. Navier-Stokes Applications

SMHS Permission Slip? Turn it in on the front table and put a check by your name NC River Basin due Friday Study Island #5 due Friday.

Comparing Embryology.

CECINA RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 24/11-2/12/2003 FLOW EVENT

Shear Strength of Soil.

continued on next slide

Transverse Shear Objective:

continued on next slide

Presentation transcript:

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 0: 18/11/99 19:30 tc, 2,23 1,25 t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion = groundwater level = river stage tc = critical shear stress -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa)

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 1: 18/11/99 21:00 1,25 2,23 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 2: 18/11/99 22:00 1,25 2,24 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 3: 18/11/99 22:30 1,25 2,24 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 4: 19/11/99 2:00 1,25 2,14 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 5: 19/11/99 3:00 1,25 2,09 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 6: 19/11/99 3:30 1,25 2,05 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 7: 19/11/99 4:00 1,11 2,02 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 8: 19/11/99 4:30 1,26 1,44 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 9: 19/11/99 5:00 1,89 1,21 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 10: 19/11/99 5:30 2,58 1,07 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 11: 19/11/99 6:00 3,10 0,96 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 11: 19/11/99 6:00 3,10 0,96 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 11: 19/11/99 6:00 3,62 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 12: 19/11/99 7:30 4,09 0,82 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 12: 19/11/99 7:30 4,09 0,82 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 12: 19/11/99 7:30 4,13 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 13: 19/11/99 9:00 3,15 0,69 1,07 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 13: 19/11/99 9:00 3,15 0,69 1,07 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 13: 19/11/99 9:00 3,19 1,07 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 14: 19/11/99 10:30 1,95 0,53 0,97 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 14: 19/11/99 10:30 1,95 0,53 0,97 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 14: 19/11/99 10:30 2,01 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 15: 19/11/99 11:00 1,44 1,55 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 16: 19/11/99 11:30 1,04 2,73 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 17: 19/11/99 12:00 0,63 1,41 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 17: 19/11/99 12:00 0,63 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 17: 19/11/99 12:00 1,40 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 18: 19/11/99 12:30 1,18 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 19: 19/11/99 13:00 1,13 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 20: 19/11/99 14:00 1,15 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 21: 19/11/99 16:00 1,21 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 22: 19/11/99 18:00 1,25 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 23: 20/11/99 0:00 1,32 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 24: 20/11/99 6:00 1,34 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Step 25: 20/11/99 12:00 1,35 tc, -30 60 30 -10 -20 10 20 40 50 uw (kPa) = river stage = groundwater level t = mean boundary shear stress tb = near-bank shear stress tc = critical shear stress LE = Lateral Erosion

Comparison of bank profiles SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Comparison of bank profiles Initial bank profile Computed final profile Measured final profile

Contribution of different processes SIEVE RIVER: SIMULATION OF THE 19/11/1999 FLOW EVENT Contribution of different processes LE (m) Fluvial erosion Cantilever Slide Entire profile Cohesive portion Total Fluvial erosion cantilever slide mass failure (m2) 12,25 9,71 0,88 1,66 2,54 (m2) 6,00 3,46 0,88 1,66 2,54 % 57,7 14,7 27,8 42,3 % 79,3 7,2 13,5 20,1