...
首页> 外文期刊>Transactions of the ASABE >METHODS FOR DETERMINING STREAMBANK CRITICAL SHEAR STRESS AND SOIL ERODIBILITY: IMPLICATIONS FOR EROSION RATE PREDICTIONS
【24h】

METHODS FOR DETERMINING STREAMBANK CRITICAL SHEAR STRESS AND SOIL ERODIBILITY: IMPLICATIONS FOR EROSION RATE PREDICTIONS

机译:确定条带临界剪切应力和土壤可湿性的方法:对腐蚀速率预测的意义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

According to the U.S. EPA, excess sediment is a significant cause of water quality impairment for rivers. The goal of this study was to compare different methods of determining two parameters used to estimate streambank erosion, soil critical shear stress (τ{sub}c) and soil erodibility (k{sub}d) and to determine the impact of those differences on predictions of streambank erosion. At 25 field sites, bank erosion tests were conducted using a submerged jet test device, and soil samples were collected. Critical shear stress was measured using a multi-angle submerged jet test device (JT) and estimated based on Shields' diagram (SD) and empirical relations based on the soil parameters, percent clay (P{sub}c), plasticity index (I{sub}w), particle size (D{sub}50) and percent silt-clay (SC). Additionally, using a single set of τ{sub}c values, the k{sub}d measured by the jet test was compared to predictions from two empirical k{sub}d relations. Using these parameter values, streambank erosion rates were predicted for a local stream. The jet τ{sub}C estimates were as much as four orders of magnitude greater than the SD, P{sub}c, and D{sub}50 estimates, indicating the SD and empirical methods underestimate τ{sub}c. The two empirical k{sub}d equations produced similar k{sub}d values that were generally two orders of magnitude less than the values from the jet test measurements. Erosion predictions followed the same trend as the k{sub}d data, with the jet test measurements resulting in higher predictions. Field validation of these methods over a wide range of soil types is recommended to develop methods of estimating k{sub}d and τ{sub}c for fine-grained streambank soils.
机译:根据美国环保署,过多的沉积物是造成河流水质受损的重要原因。这项研究的目的是比较确定两个参数的不同方法,这些参数用于估算河岸侵蚀,土壤临界切应力(τ{sub} c)和土壤易蚀性(k {sub} d),并确定这些差异对河岸侵蚀的预测。在25个现场,使用浸没式射流试验装置进行了河岸侵蚀试验,并收集了土壤样品。使用多角度浸没式射流试验装置(JT)测量了临界剪切应力,并根据Shields图(SD)进行了估算,并根据土壤参数,黏土百分比(P {sub} c),可塑性指数(I {sub} w),粒径(D {sub} 50)和粉砂粘土百分比(SC)。另外,使用一组单独的τ{sub} c值,将由喷射试验测得的k {sub} d与来自两个经验k {sub} d关系的预测进行比较。使用这些参数值,可以预测本地河流的河岸侵蚀率。射流τ{sub} C估计值比SD,P {sub} c和D {sub} 50估计值高四个数量级,这表明SD和经验方法低估了τ{sub} c。这两个经验性的k {sub} d方程产生了相似的k {sub} d值,通常比喷射试验测量的值小两个数量级。侵蚀预测的趋势与k {sub} d数据的趋势相同,而射流试验的测量结果则得出更高的预测值。建议使用这些方法在广泛的土壤类型上进行实地验证,以开发估算细粒河岸土壤k {sub} d和τ{sub} c的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号