My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD08739
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
FLOOD08739
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:15:25 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 3:49:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
Determination of Roughness Coefficients for Streams in Colorado
Date
1/1/1985
Prepared For
CWCB
Prepared By
CWCB
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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 />Where the channel vegetation is well established, covers most of the <br />channel, and controls channel roughness, guidelines for overbank flow resist- <br />ance given in the section "Overbank Flow Resistance" needs to be used to <br />assign n values. <br /> <br />Degree of Meandering, ill <br /> <br />The increase in channel roughness due to small curves and bends generally <br />is considered to be insignificant. The effects of sharp bends may extend for <br />some distance downstream. Streams containing sharp bends need to be divided <br />into a typical reach as previously discussed. The degree of meandering is <br />computed as the ratio of the straight length of the reach under consideration <br />(L ) divided by the meander length (L ) of the channel in the reach. The <br />mo~ified value for meandering is obtaTned by multiplying the total additive <br />effects of the other factors for this reach by L /L . <br />s ill <br /> <br />When floods in meandering channels are out of the banks and flow down- <br />valley across the meanders, the n value is larger. Wormleaton and others <br />(1982) indicate that the traditional methods of calculating the discharge in <br />compound channels (main channel and subdivided overbank flow) do not fully <br />account for energy losses, and that channel discharge capacity is considerably <br />overestimated. Their study indicates that the tendency is further exaggerated <br />when overbank roughness is greater than main channel roughness. No guidelines <br />are presently available for determining the effects of varying roughness in <br />compound channels nor these effects on n values, although most floods occupy <br />the overbanks. <br /> <br />CHANNEL FLOW RESISTANCE <br /> <br />Natural Channels <br /> <br />Median particle size generally is used to.classify natural stream chan- <br />nels as either stable or movable (sand) bed. A sand-bed channel is comprised <br />of an unlimited supply of particles less than about 0.079 in. (2 millimeters) <br />in diameter. For sand channels, bed-form roughness associated with movable or <br />sand-bed channels is important and needs to be considered. <br /> <br />Channels composed of coarse material having a median particle size <br />greater than 0.079 in. (2 millimeters) generally are relatively stable; how- <br />ever, even stable channels may be subject to significant bank and bed erosion <br />and act as a movable bed stream at high discharges. If channel erosion has <br />occurred in the past or is anticipated during high flows, it needs to be <br />accounted for in subsequent hydraulic analysis. <br /> <br />Sand-Bed Channels <br /> <br />Resistance to flow in sand-bed (movable) streams varies greatly, depend- <br />ing on the velocity of flow, grain size, shear, and other variables, because <br />the moving bed material takes on different bed forms. The flows that produce <br /> <br />19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.