4.2 Article

Celerity and Height of Aggradation Fronts in Gravel-Bed Laboratory Channel

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING
卷 147, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001923

关键词

Sediment transport; Aggradation; Front celerity; Front height; Predictive formulae

资金

  1. Fondazione Cariplo (Italy) [2017-0722]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The laboratory experiments were designed to quantify the height and migration rate of an aggrading gravel front with a focus on the Froude number and load ratio as control parameters. The results showed that the dimensionless height and celerity of the aggradation front were determined by the load ratio and Froude number.
We present the results of laboratory experiments specifically designed to quantify the height and migration rate of an aggrading gravel front. The experiments were performed in sediment feed mode with constant water and sediment supply. Particular care was put into the experimental procedure and the methods to determine the quantities of interest to ensure reproducibility of the results. The celerity and height of an aggradation front were modeled as functions of the Froude number of the flow for the initial bed profile and of a load ratio defined as the ratio of the sediment feed rate to the transport capacity of the flow for the initial bed. The two control parameters (Froude number and load ratio) also determined the translational or dispersive nature of a sediment front. Two predictors were provided to estimate the dimensionless height and celerity of an aggradation front. The former was an increasing function of the load ratio and a decreasing function of the Froude number, and the latter was roughly proportional to the squared Froude number and had no evident relationship with the load ratio. The present results are of interest for scholars and practitioners needing to determine the key properties of swift gravel fronts as those developing, for example, during flash floods.

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