The doi above is for this specific version of this collection, which is currently the latest. Newer versions may be published in the future. For a link that will always point to the latest version, please use
doi: 10.4121/e8411014-8ed2-42c3-a733-b61f9bb125f0

de Lange, Sjoukje; Hoitink, A.J.F. (Ton); Naqshband, Suleyman (2023): Quantifying hydraulic roughness from field data: can dune morphology tell the whole story?. Version 1. 4TU.ResearchData. collection. https://doi.org/10.4121/e8411014-8ed2-42c3-a733-b61f9bb125f0.v1

Collection

• Physical Geography and Environmental Geoscience
• Earth Sciences

bedforms, field data, hydraulic roughness, multibeam echosounder

2014-2016

by Sjoukje de Lange , A.J.F. (Ton) Hoitink , Suleyman Naqshband

Hydraulic roughness is a fundamental property in river research, as it directly affects water levels, flow strength and the associated sediment transport rates. It is essential to identify and quantify the spatiotemporal roughness variation to improve operational models of flow, sediment transport and morphodynamics, yet quantification of roughness is challenging as it is not directly measurable in the field. In lowland rivers, bedforms are a major source of hydraulic roughness. Decades of research has focused on dunes to allow parameterisation of hydraulic roughness. This study aims to establish the predictive capacity of current roughness predictors, and to identify reasons for the unexplained part of the variance in roughness. We quantify hydraulic roughness based on the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor calculated from hydraulic field data of a 78 km long trajectory of the Lower Rhine and River Waal in the Netherlands. This is compared to predicted roughness values based on dune geometry, and to the spatial distribution of the local topographic leeside angle, both inferred from bathymetric field data. Results from both approaches show the same general trend and magnitude of roughness values (friction factor f=0.019-0.069, mean 0.035). Roughness inferred from dune geometry explains 42\% of the variance, for the best performing predictor. Efforts to explain the remaining variance from statistics of the local topographic leeside angles, which supposedly control flow separation, were unsuccessful. Unexpectedly, multi-kilometer depth oscillations explain 34\% of the total roughness variations. We suggest that flow divergence associated with depth increase causes energy loss, which is reflected in an elevated hydraulic roughness. Depth variations occur in many rivers worldwide, which may imply a cause of flow resistance that needs further study.

• 2023-10-13 first online, published, posted

4TU.ResearchData

Wageningen University