My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9568
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9568
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:36 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 3:40:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9568
Author
Resource Consultants Inc.
Title
Sediment Transport Studies of the Little Snake, Yampa, and Green River Systems.
USFW Year
1991.
USFW - Doc Type
Fort Collins, CO.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
187
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />5.2.3 Comparison of Rating Curves. In Section 5.2, coefficients for sediment rating curves for <br />Deerlodge Park and Mathers Hole were derived. Sediment continuity between these two sites was assessed <br />by comparison of these two sets of sediment data. To maintain sediment continuity, the inflow of sediment <br />(from Deerlodge Park), less the outflow of sediment (at Mathers Hole), must be equal to the time rate of <br />change in sediment storage between these two locations. Theoretically, the continuity of sediment can be <br />evaluated by performing a sediment budget analysis where inflows and outflows of sediment in a selected <br />reach are summed over a period of time and subtracted. The difference between these two values is then <br />the volume of sediment stored (If sediment inflows are greater than outflows), or removed (if outflows of <br />sediment are greater than inflows). <br /> <br />Typically, sediment continuity is evaluated by conducting a sediment budget analysis. Such an <br />analysis can be conducted using sediment rating curves which relate water discharge to sediment discharge. <br />Given a water discharge history, the sediment discharge can be computed at the inflow section and outflow <br />section of a selected reach. <br /> <br />O~ectives <br /> <br />While simple in concept, the application of the sediment continuity principle using a sediment <br />budget analysis must be carefully considered based upon the objectives of the analysis and the applicability <br />of the data available to perform the analysis. One objective of such an analysis would be to evaluate existing <br />conditions to determine whether the reach is aggrading (deposition), or degrading (erosion). For this type <br />of analysis the measured rating curves for the upstream and downstream locations of the study reach can be <br />used to derme the sediment inflow and sediment outflow. If the change in sediment volume is small (i. e., <br />the inflow and outflow are approximately equal), then it can be concluded that neither significant erosion or <br />deposition is occurring. However, it is important to recognize that this does not necessarily imply that the <br />reach is in equilibrium, since equilibrium is dermed as a balance between supply and transport capacity (see <br />Section 5.1.2). Only if the measured sediment outflow is indicative of sediment transport capacity can a <br />statement on equilibrium be made. <br /> <br />A second objective would be to evaluate whether or not the reach is in equilibrium and if not, <br />determine the changes in water discharge or sediment supply which would result in equilibrium. For this <br />analysis, the sediment outflow relationship must be indicative of the transport capacity of the channel In <br />the particular case of a supply limited reach, such an analysis would quantify the extent of change that could <br />be tolerated without inducing changes in overall channel morphology. In other words, in a supply limited <br />reach, two separate sediment budgets could be completed; one to establish whether or not stable conditions <br />currently exist in the reach (i. e., no significant erosion or deposition) based on the measured sediment <br />outflow relationship, and a second to evaluate the potential increase in sediment supply, or alternatively, the <br />reduction in transport capacity, that could be tolerated without inducing changes in channel morphology, <br />based on the estimated transport capacity relationship. <br /> <br />The use of sediment rating curves was originally introduced as a means of computing sediment <br />discharge in sand bed streams where transported sediments are derived primarily from the bed or banks of <br />the stream. Although some scatter in the data is expected for sand bed streams, clear relationships between <br />water discharge and sediment discharge can generally be observed. For streams which derive sediments <br />from other sources (e.g. from the watershed or bank failure), the relationship between water and sediment <br />discharge is less identifiable (see Colby 1956). Still, a sediment budget can be applied for streams with <br />coarser bed sediments, if a valid water-sediment relationship exists. <br /> <br />The computation of a sediment budget between two locations on a stream also depends on water <br />discharge. Since the Yampa Canyon study reach is essentially canyon-bound with no major tributary inflow, <br />the daily discharge history in the Yampa River between Deerlodge Park and Mathers Hole is considered to <br />be nearly the same. With this assumption, only the sediment rating curves need to be compared to evaluate <br />the objectives discussed previously. <br /> <br />5-10 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.