Figure 1. Geometries and bed topography settings of the nine computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations with channel curvature (C) changed from 0.77 to 0

Abstract

하천 복원 노력을 지원하기 위해 우리는 하천 파괴 속도를 늦출 필요가 있습니다. 이 연구는 하천 곡률 보호를 위해 구불 구불 한 하천이 곧게 펴질 때 수리적 복잡성 손실에 대한 자세한 설명을 제공합니다.

전산 유체 역학 (CFD) 모델링을 사용하여 채널 곡률 (C)이 잘 확립된 사행 굽힘 (C = 0.77)에서 곡률이 없는 직선 채널 (C = 0)로 저하되는 9 개의 시뮬레이션에서 유동 역학의 차이를 문서화했습니다.

공변량을 제어하고 수리적 복잡성에 대한 손실률을 늦추기 위해 각 9 개 채널 구현은 동등한 베드 형태 지형을 가졌습니다. 분석된 수력학적 변수에는 흐름 표면 고도, 흐름 방향 및 횡단 단위 배출, 흐름 방향, 가로 방향 및 수직 방향의 유속, 베드 전단 응력, 흐름 함수 및 채널 베드에서의 수직 저 유량 유속 비율이 포함되었습니다.

수력 복잡성의 손실은 처음에 수로를 C = 0.77에서 C = 0.33 (즉, 수로의 반경이 수로 폭의 3 배임) 할 때 점차적으로 발생했으며, 추가 직선화는 수력 복잡성에 대한 급속한 손실을 초래했습니다.

다른 연구에서는 수리적 복잡성이 중요한 하천 서식지를 제공하고 생물 다양성과 양의 상관 관계가 있음을 보여주었습니다. 이 연구는 강을 풀 때 수력학적 복잡성이 점진적으로 사라졌다가 빠르게 사라지는 방법을 보여줍니다.

To assist river restoration efforts we need to slow the rate of river degradation. This study provides a detailed explanation of the hydraulic complexity loss when a meandering river is straightened in order to motivate the protection of river channel curvature. We used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling to document the difference in flow dynamics in nine simulations with channel curvature (C) degrading from a well-established tight meander bend (C = 0.77) to a straight channel without curvature (C = 0). To control for covariates and slow the rate of loss to hydraulic complexity, each of the nine-channel realizations had equivalent bedform topography. The analyzed hydraulic variables included the flow surface elevation, streamwise and transverse unit discharge, flow velocity at streamwise, transverse, and vertical directions, bed shear stress, stream function, and the vertical hyporheic flux rates at the channel bed. The loss of hydraulic complexity occurred gradually when initially straightening the channel from C = 0.77 to C = 0.33 (i.e., the radius of the channel is three-times the channel width), and additional straightening incurred rapid losses to hydraulic complexity. Other studies have shown hydraulic complexity provides important riverine habitat and is positively correlated with biodiversity. This study demonstrates how hydraulic complexity can be gradually and then rapidly lost when unwinding a river, and hopefully will serve as a cautionary tale.

Figure 1. Geometries and bed topography settings of the nine computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations with channel curvature (C) changed from 0.77 to 0
Figure 1. Geometries and bed topography settings of the nine computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations with channel curvature (C) changed from 0.77 to 0
Figure 2. Flow surface elevation (h) normalized by H at C = 0.77, C = 0.33, and C = 0 conditions. n denotes the lateral coordination with n = 0 at channel center and B denotes the channel width.
Figure 2. Flow surface elevation (h) normalized by H at C = 0.77, C = 0.33, and C = 0 conditions. n denotes the lateral coordination with n = 0 at channel center and B denotes the channel width.
Figure 3. Normalized flow surface profiles for the nine simulations at the point bar apex 1.5 s/B. The insert plot shows the second order derivative of normalized flow surface elevation in the transverse direction, Fh00(n/B), which gives the convexity or concavity of the surface profile curves.
Figure 3. Normalized flow surface profiles for the nine simulations at the point bar apex 1.5 s/B. The insert plot shows the second order derivative of normalized flow surface elevation in the transverse direction, Fh00(n/B), which gives the convexity or concavity of the surface profile curves.
Figure 4. Streamwise unit discharge qs/UH for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 4. Streamwise unit discharge qs/UH for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 5. Transverse unit discharge qn/UH for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 5. Transverse unit discharge qn/UH for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.

Reference : https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/12/6/1680

Figure 6. Transverse unit discharge averaged over the transverse direction. The inset shows the R2 of transverse unit discharge < qn/UH > between each curvature, C, and the straight channel condition (C = 0, R2 = 1); a lower R2 suggests greater hydraulic complexity for transverse unit discharge.
Figure 6. Transverse unit discharge averaged over the transverse direction. The inset shows the R2 of transverse unit discharge < qn/UH > between each curvature, C, and the straight channel condition (C = 0, R2 = 1); a lower R2 suggests greater hydraulic complexity for transverse unit discharge.
Figure 7. Normalized depth averaged streamwise velocity <vs>/U for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 7. Normalized depth averaged streamwise velocity /U for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 8. The first moment of normalized depth averaged streamwise velocity <vs>/U, which represents center of gravity of the streamwise flow distribution, along the channel. The inset shows the R2 of the first moment of <vs>/U between each curvature and the straight channel condition (C = 0, R2 = 1); a lower R2 suggests greater hydraulic complexity for the first moment of depth averaged streamwise velocity.
Figure 8. The first moment of normalized depth averaged streamwise velocity /U, which represents center of gravity of the streamwise flow distribution, along the channel. The inset shows the R2 of the first moment of /U between each curvature and the straight channel condition (C = 0, R2 = 1); a lower R2 suggests greater hydraulic complexity for the first moment of depth averaged streamwise velocity.
Figure 9. Distribution of river channel bed shear Cf for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 9. Distribution of river channel bed shear Cf for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions.
Figure 10. Normalized vertical hyporheic flux vzbed/U at 2 mm below sediment surface for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions. Positive indicates upwelling of groundwater into the river channel.
Figure 10. Normalized vertical hyporheic flux vzbed/U at 2 mm below sediment surface for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions. Positive indicates upwelling of groundwater into the river channel.
Figure 11. Normalized vertical velocity <vz>/U for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions, with positive values upward flows, negative values downward flows.
Figure 11. Normalized vertical velocity /U for channel curvature C = 0.77, 0.33, and 0 conditions, with positive values upward flows, negative values downward flows.
Figure 12. Transverse stream function distribution ψ/UBH reveals the secondary circulation of transverse flow cells rotating at the meander apex 1.5 s/B for channel curvature C = 0.77 (A), C = 0.33 (B), and C = 0 (C), with positive values representing clockwise rotation direction when facing upstream, and negative values representing counter-clockwise rotation when facing upstream.
Figure 12. Transverse stream function distribution ψ/UBH reveals the secondary circulation of transverse flow cells rotating at the meander apex 1.5 s/B for channel curvature C = 0.77 (A), C = 0.33 (B), and C = 0 (C), with positive values representing clockwise rotation direction when facing upstream, and negative values representing counter-clockwise rotation when facing upstream.

References

  1. Paper 422-H); U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1966.
  2. Leopold, L.B.; Wolman, M.G. River meanders. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 196071, 769–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wohl, E. Rivers in the Landscape; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  4. Dietrich, W.E.; Smith, J.D. Influence of the point bar on flow through curved channels. Water Resour. Res. 198319, 1173–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Harvey, J.W.; Bencala, K. The effects of streambed topography on surface-subsurface water exchange in mountains catchments. Water Resour. Res. 199329, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bridge, J.S. Rivers and Floodplains: Forms, Processes, and Sedimentary Record; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  7. Schumm, S.A. Patterns of alluvial rivers. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 198513, 5–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Vermeulen, B.; Hoitink, A.J.F.; Labeur, R.J. Flow structure caused by a local cross-sectional area increase and curvature in a sharp river bend. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 2015120, 1771–1783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Konsoer, K.M.; Rhoads, B.L.; Best, J.L.; Langendoen, E.J.; Abad, J.D.; Parsons, D.R.; Garcia, M.H. Three-dimensional flow structure and bed morphology in large elongate meander loops with different outer bank roughness characteristics. Water Resour. Res. 201652, 9621–9641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Li, B.D.; Zhang, X.H.; Tang, H.S.; Tsubaki, R. Influence of deflection angles on flow behaviours in openchannel bends. J. Mt. Sci. 201815, 2292–2306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gualtieri, C.; Abdi, R.; Ianniruberto, M.; Filizola, N.; Endreny, T.A. A 3D analysis of spatial habitat metrics about the confluence of Negro and Solimões rivers, Brazil. Ecohydrology 202013, e2166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gualtieri, C.; Ianniruberto, M.; Filizola, N.; Santos, R.; Endreny, T. Hydraulic complexity at a large river confluence in the Amazon basin. Ecohydrology 201710, e1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kozarek, J.; Hession, W.; Dolloff, C.; Diplas, P. Hydraulic complexity metrics for evaluating in-stream brook trout habitat. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2010136, 1067–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. McCoy, E.D.; Bell, S.S.; Mushinsky, H.R. Habitat structure: Synthesis and perspectives. In Habitat Structure; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1991; pp. 427–430. [Google Scholar]
  15. Re-Engineering Britain’s Rivers. The Economist. 6 March 2020. Available online: https://www.latestnigeriannews.com/news/8279579/reengineering-britains-rivers.html (accessed on 12 April 2020).
  16. Palmer, M.A.; Bernhardt, E.; Allan, J.; Lake, P.S.; Alexander, G.; Brooks, S.; Carr, J.; Clayton, S.; Dahm, C.; Follstad Shah, J.; et al. Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. J. Appl. Ecol. 200542, 208–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Abad, J.D.; Rhoads, B.L.; Güneralp, İ.; García, M.H. Flow structure at different stages in a meander-bend with bendway weirs. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2008134, 1052–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Blanckaert, K.; Schnauder, I.; Sukhodolov, A.; van Balen, W.; Uijttewaal, W. Meandering: Field Experiments, Laboratory Experiments and Numerical Modeling. Technical Report. 2009. Available online: https://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/146621/files/2009-695-Blanckaert_et_al-Meandering_field_experiments_laboratory_experiments_and_numerical.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2020).
  19. Constantinescu, G.; Koken, M.; Zeng, J. The structure of turbulent flow in an open channel bend of strong curvature with deformed bed: Insight provided by detached eddy simulation. Water Resour. Res. 201147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Sawyer, A.H.; Bayani Cardenas, M.; Buttles, J. Hyporheic exchange due to channel-spanning logs. Water Resour. Res. 201147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhou, T.; Endreny, T. Meander hydrodynamics initiated by river restoration deflectors. Hydrol. Process. 201226, 3378–3392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hirt, C.W.; Nichols, B.D. Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. J. Comput. Phys. 198139, 201–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Van Balen, W.; Uijttewaal, W.; Blanckaert, K. Large-eddy simulation of a curved open-channel flow over topography. Phys. Fluids 201022, 075108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Blanckaert, K. Topographic steering, flow recirculation, velocity redistribution, and bed topography in sharp meander bends. Water Resour. Res. 201046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zeng, J.; Constantinescu, G.; Blanckaert, K.; Weber, L. Flow and bathymetry in sharp open-channel bends: Experiments and predictions. Water Resour. Res. 200844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Elliott, A.H.; Brooks, N.H. Transfer of nonsorbing solutes to a streambed with bed forms: Laboratory experiments. Water Resour. Res. 199733, 137–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zhou, T.; Endreny, T.A. Reshaping of the hyporheic zone beneath river restoration structures: Flume and hydrodynamic experiments. Water Resour. Res. 201349, 5009–5020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lane, S.; Bradbrook, K.; Richards, K.; Biron, P.; Roy, A. The application of computational fluid dynamics to natural river channels: Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional approaches. Geomorphology 199929, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Vardy, A. Fluid Principles; McGraw-Hill International Series in Civil Engineering; McGraw-Hill: London, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rozovskii, I.L. Flow of Water in Bends of Open Channels; Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR: Kiev, Ukraine, 1957. [Google Scholar]
  31. Blanckaert, K.; De Vriend, H.J. Secondary flow in sharp open-channel bends. J. Fluid Mech. 2004498, 353–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Johannesson, H.; Parker, G. Linear theory of river meanders. River Meand. 198912, 181–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Camporeale, C.; Perona, P.; Porporato, A.; Ridolfi, L. Hierarchy of models for meandering rivers and related morphodynamic processes. Rev. Geophys. 200745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. He, L. Distribution of primary and secondary currents in sine-generated bends. Water SA 201844, 118–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Liao, J.C.; Beal, D.N.; Lauder, G.V.; Triantafyllou, M.S. Fish exploiting vortices decrease muscle activity. Science 2003302, 1566–1569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Crispell, J.K.; Endreny, T.A. Hyporheic exchange flow around constructed in-channel structures and implications for restoration design. Hydrol. Process. 20091168, 1158–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hester, E.T.; Gooseff, M.N. Moving Beyond the Banks: Hyporheic Restoration Is Fundamental to Restoring Ecological Services and Functions of Streams. Environ. Sci. Technol. 201044, 1521–1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]