4.2 Article

2D numerical analysis of the influence of near-bank vegetation patches on the bed morphological adjustment

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL FLUID MECHANICS
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 707-738

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10652-019-09718-5

关键词

Near-bank vegetation; 2D hydro-morphological model; Bed morphological adjustment; Pool and riffle; Ecological restoration and conservation

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFC1502504]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51639007, 41771543]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the influence of near-bank vegetation patches on the bed morphological adjustment in open channel flow systems. The 2D depth-averaged hydro-morphological model is adopted for this investigation, which is first validated by laboratory experimental data measured in an open channel with a single near-bank vegetation patch. The validated model is then applied for extensive numerical simulations, with the aim of conducting a systematic analysis of the influence of different geometric controlling parameters on the bed morphological evolution. The controlling parameters taken into account for numerical analysis include the angle of repose value (RAV) of sediment, vegetation density (VD), patch length (PL) and patch width (PW). The numerical results and analysis show that: (1) the RAV of sediment with slope-failure parametrization only influences the shape of the transverse bed topography in the junction region; (2) increase in VD, PL and PW that substantially enhances flow blockage effect encourages the growth of the pool adjacent to the patch in three dimensions; (3) increase in VD, PL and PW produces analogous retrogressive erosion (erosion toward the upstream) in the pool region, presumably due to the increase in flow resistance. Additional numerical experiments suggest that the staggered-order distribution of multiple patches might be an optimal choice for channel restoration and conservation since pools and riffles with larger scales can be produced.

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

4.2
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