Analysis and Comparison on Typical Methods for Predicting Composite Roughness of River

Liang Zhong; Guang Xiang Xu; Feng Zeng

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.518-523.4111

Paper Titles

Study on Ecological Water Table in a Reclaimed Water Irrigation Area in the North China Plain
p.4088

The Multi-Objective Differential Evolutionary Algorithms and its Application in Optimal Allocation of Water Resources
p.4093

To Classify the Groundwater Hydrographs by Factor Analysis Method
p.4097

Advancement in Research of Hydrological Processes Simulation for Karst Region and Future Challenges
p.4104

Analysis and Comparison on Typical Methods for Predicting Composite Roughness of River
p.4111

Analysis of Hydrological Data Based on BP Neural Network Approximation and Polynomial Fitting
p.4115

Analysis of Interactions between Surface Water and Groundwater by Using Water Chemistry and δD, δ¹⁸O — Case Study of Bulang River Basin
p.4119

Analysis of Legal System and Public Policy on Rural Water Source in China
p.4126

Analysis on Reinjecting Modes in Geothermal Well of Porous Aquifer
p.4130

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 518-523Analysis and Comparison on Typical Methods for...

Analysis and Comparison on Typical Methods for Predicting Composite Roughness of River

Abstract:

Composite roughness is an important parameter in river hydraulic calculations. In this paper, various typical methods for predicting composite roughness of river were summarized, including Einstein Method, Lotter Method, JIANG Method and Weighted Average Method, their theoretical rigors were discussed from both perspectives of minimum energy dissipation principle and analytical analysis, and their calculation precisions were verified by a large number of flume test data. Research shows that Einstein Method complies with the principle of minimum energy dissipation, also is the necessary and sufficient condition of resistance equation having unique solution, and its calculation precision is higher, therefore, Einstein Method is more suitable for composite resistance calculation of river with single cross section.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Advances in Environmental Science and Engineering

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 518-523)

Pages:

4111-4114

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.518-523.4111

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

May 2012

Authors:

Liang Zhong, Guang Xiang Xu, Feng Zeng

Keywords:

Analysis and Comparison, Analytic Analysis, Calculation Methods, Channel, Composite Roughness, Principle of Minimum Energy Dissipation

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] R. G. Kennedy: Minutes of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineering, 119, (1895), pp.281-290.

Google Scholar

[2] H. A. Einstein: Appendix II of the paper "Formulas for the transportation of bed load," Transaction, ASCE, 107, (1942), pp.575-577.

Google Scholar

[3] G. K. Lotter: Trans., All-Union Sci. Res. Inst. Hyd. Engin., Leningrad, U.S.S.R., Vol. 9. (1933).

Google Scholar

[4] Guogan Jiang, in: Study Report B-1, Central Hydraulic Lab, Beijing (1948). (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[5] Wei Li, in: Hydraulic calculation handbook, China Water Power Press, Beijing (2006). (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[6] A. K. Motayed, M. Krishnamurthy: Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, vol. 106, 6, (1980), pp.1111-1116.

Google Scholar

[7] Shutang Hao: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 8, (1992), pp.38-43. (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[8] N. Chien, Z.H. Wan, in: Mechanics of sediment transport, ASCE Press, Virginia (1999).

Google Scholar

[9] Guangxiang Xu: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 7, (1996), pp.31-36. (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[10] Kejun Yang, Shuyou Cao, Xingnian Liu: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, vol.36, 7,(2005), pp.780-786. (In Chinese)

Google Scholar