Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />26 <br /> <br />PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND HYDRAULIC STUDIES OF RIVERS <br /> <br />average value of z,Leopold (1953, p, 619) suggested --.49, <br />but analysis of additional data leads us to revise this to <br />_,95.' The average downstream relations, therefore, <br />can be represented by point 8 marked with a triangle in <br />figure 22. This indicates that the average value of y is <br />--0.3, which means that channel roughness decreases <br />slightly downstream for discharge of constant frequency. <br />This apparently is related to some progressive down- <br />stream decrease in bed-particle size resulting from <br />sorting and abrasion. <br />From the graph it can be seen that if width, depth, <br />and velocity changed downstream at rates respectively <br />equal to those in the average river (b=.5,]=.4, m=.l) <br />and if roughness (measured by Manning-type n') <br />remained constant downstream (y=O), then slope would <br />decrease dm,vnstream with increasing discharge in the <br />form <br /> <br />SCXQ-.33 <br /> <br />" <br />In few natural rivers~ however, does roughness relnain <br />eonstant downstream. <br />Values of ] and z for several rivers are plotted in <br />figure 22, and the corresponding values of the exponent <br />Y J expressing rate of change of roughness) ean be read <br />from the scale given by the sloping lines, Point 2, <br />representing the Kansas-Republican River systeml indi- <br />cates a near-average value for rate of change of depth <br />(j=0.43). The nearly constant value of roughness <br />downstream (y=O) in that river system is presumably <br />related to the fact that bed-particle size decreases a <br />relatively small amount, ranging from sand near the <br />headwaters to silt farther downstream. Consequently, <br />the river gradient decreases downstream less rapidly <br />tban in the other rivers; that is, the value of z is about <br />- .4, whereas most of the other rivers have values <br />between -.8 and -1.1. <br />The headwaters of the Yellowstone and Bighorn <br />Rivers rise in coarse gravel \vhich decreases to fine sand <br />in the main 11issouri) and this river has a correspond- <br />ingly rapid change of gradient as indicated by the large <br />negative value of z in figure 22. Thus it appears that <br />an important effect of decreasing particle size down- <br />stream is to decrease the roughness dO\l,rnstream. <br /> <br />EFFECT OF CHANGE OF PARTICLE SIZE AND <br />VELOCITY ON STREAM GRADIENT <br /> <br />Channel roughness is not determined entirely by <br />particle size. That our roughness factor is not neces- <br />sarily proportional to the sixth root of bed particle <br />size-as would be expected from the Strickler equation <br />n=ck'/6 (see O'Brien and Hickox, 1937, p, 314)- <br />follows from the fact that n' involves not only the grain <br />roughness but also resistance attributable to channel' <br />configuration and other factors. However, for load <br /> <br />composed of coarse sand or gravel, channel roughness <br />is materially influenced by the size of grains. The <br />manner in which particles of finer materials are piled <br />into dunes and riflles becomes an important determin- <br />ant of channel resistance. <br />For a given rate of change of depth and velocity, thc <br />rate of dccrease of stream slope (concavity of the pro- <br />file) is adjusted to the rate of decrease of particle size <br />as expressed by rouglmess. In figure 22 this may be <br />seen by comparing points 2 and 6. Each has a value <br />of] approximately equal to 0.45; that is, in these two <br />streams the downstream rates of increase of depth with <br />discharge are nearly identical. River 2 is characterized <br />by nearly constant roughness downstream (y=O), <br />whereas river 6 has a rapid downstream decrease of <br />roughness (y ~ -- 0.3). Likewise, the slope of river 6 <br />decreases much more rapidly downstream (z~ --1.1) <br />than river 2, (z~ --0.4). <br />During the initial field work in New Mexico particle- <br />size measurements of bed material 'were made by sieving <br />scoop samples. The results were quite inconsistent <br />owing to the largc range of size over the bed even <br />within short reaches. In 1954 the senior author re- <br />turned to the field area with M. Gordon Wolman t{) ob- <br />tain new measurements, Using a grid-system sampling <br />method (described by Wolman, 1954b) , bed-material <br />size was measured at those reaches where discharge <br />measurements had becn obtained earlier, and these <br />data are summarized in appendix D. <br />These data were plotted against discharge corrc- <br />sponding to the stream order at the places of measure- <br />ment, and the graph is presented as figure 23. The line <br />drawn through the points shows the downstream rela- <br />tion of discharge to grain size, and can be expressed R3 <br /> <br />D50cx Q-'" <br /> <br />wheTe Dso is the median grain size; that is, 50 peTcent <br />of the grains are finer. <br />The streams in central New Mexico are charactcrized <br />by the following set of values: ]=0,3, z= --0.24; and <br />the coordinates of these values in figure 22 are indicated <br /> <br />1 Other ways of deriving an approximate value for this expo- <br />nent can be obtained from the equation presented by Hack(1955) <br />relating I:3tream length, l, and slope, s, <br /> <br />s<x:l-1 <br /> <br />and his equation relating length to drainage area <br /> <br />locA~.6 <br /> <br />Combining these with the generalization typified by figure 21 <br />that bankfull flood discharge <br /> <br />Q2.3rx..I.\.:,/o <br /> <br />then <br /> <br />,CXQ-O.8 <br />2,3 <br />