4.2 Article

LOCAL SCOUR ESTIMATION AT CHECK DAMS IN TORRENTIAL STREAMS IN SOUTH EAST SPAIN

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0459.2009.00361.x

关键词

check dams; local scouring; temporal evolution; ephemeral channels; south east Spain

资金

  1. Fundacion Instituto Euromediterraneo de Hidrotecnia
  2. European Council
  3. Comunidad Autonoma de la Region de Murcia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For several decades, the check dam building has been one of the most commonly used structural measures in the Forestry Hydrological Restoration Programs and Plans in the torrential basins of south east Spain. Two examples are the catchments studied here, drained by the Carcavo and Torrecilla torrential streams belonging to the Segura Basin. Obtaining a more stable bed and a less powerful flow requires transitory hydro-morphological stages such as check dam filling upstream or local erosion downstream. The main aims of this paper are to estimate local scouring induced by check dams downstream, and to find evolution stages of scouring depth, the response time of the local erosion point and the local maximum depth to reach a stable bed situation. To do this, the results obtained by different methods were compared with measured scour depths for various hydraulic radii. From this comparison, performed in non-uniform sediment size beds and in clear-water conditions, the Fahlbusch's formula gives a better fit, while the Jaeger's and Bormann and Julien's methods tend to underestimate the results. These may be used to calculate local instantaneous scouring in flows less than bankfull, but give a worse estimate for maximum equilibrium scouring. Under active bed conditions, the temporal response of the cross-sections experiencing local scour processes below these structures reflects the variations in hydraulic regime during flooding. In general, a rapid evolution phase is followed by a slow stage, which in the most torrential sectors has still not reached the equilibrium threshold.

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