DOCSLIB.ORG

Sediment and Erosion Design Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sediment and Erosion Design Guide SEDIMENT AND EROSION DESIGN GUIDE Prepared for Southern Sandoval County Arroyo Flood Control Authority 1041 Commercial Dr. SE Rio Rancho, New Mexico 87124 Prepared by 1730 S. College Ave #100 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 November 2008 Acknowledgements This manual was compiled by Dr. Bob Mussetter, Mussetter Engineering, Inc. with assistance from the DPM Technical Committee (David Stoliker, Robert Foglesong, Trevor Alsop, Fred Aguirre, Howard Stone, Clint Dodge, Jeff Mortenson, and Randall Carroll). Much of the material in this manual was originally compiled for the Albuquerque Metropolitan Flood Control Authority (AMAFCA) Erosion and Sediment Design Guide that was published in 1994, modified and updated for applicability to the SSCAFCA jurisdictional area. Disclaimer This document is provided as a guidance document in the SSCAFCA and City of Rio Rancho area. The intent of this document is to assist regulatory authorities, engineers, developers, and other interested parties in understanding the dynamic behavior of arroyos and other natural or naturalistic drainageways, and identifying appropriate means of protecting people and property from flooding, erosion and sedimentation during storm events up to and including the 100-year event. The user should report any errors in this document promptly to SSCAFCA and the City of Rio Rancho. The user accepts full responsibility for application of the guidance information contained herein to their particular situations. 12603 SSCAFCA Sediment and Erosion Design Guide i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ i Disclaimer ...................................................................................................................................... i CONSTANTS AND CONVERSIONS............................................................................................ x LIST OF VARIABLES .................................................................................................................. xi INDEX ........................................................................................................................................ xiv 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................1.1 1.1. Purpose and Scope of Manual...................................................................................1.1 1.2. Arroyo Process—A General Statement of the Problem .............................................1.2 2. GEOMORPHIC AND WATERSHED PROCESSES IN TRIBUTARIES OF THE MIDDLE RIO GRANDE IN AND NEAR THE SSCAFCA JURISDICTIONAL AREA...........2.1 2.1. Geomorphology of the Area .......................................................................................2.1 2.1.1. Landforms ..........................................................................................................2.1 2.1.1.1. Alluvial Fans ...................................................................................................2.1 2.1.1.2. Pediments .......................................................................................................2.1 2.1.1.3. Alluvial Terraces..............................................................................................2.1 2.1.1.4. Floodplains of the Major Channels .................................................................2.2 2.1.1.5. The Ceja Mesa and Volcanic Plateau ............................................................2.2 2.1.2. Geomorphology of the SSCAFCA Area ...............................................................2.2 2.2. Rainfall-Runoff Processes..........................................................................................2.4 2.3. Sediment Yield............................................................................................................2.5 3. CHANNEL DYNAMICS.......................................................................................................3.1 3.1. Arroyo Geomorphology ..............................................................................................3.1 3.1.1. Channel Incision.................................................................................................3.1 3.1.2. Channel Widening ..............................................................................................3.2 3.1.3. Arroyo Evolution .................................................................................................3.2 3.2. Hydraulic Factors and Principles .................................................................................3.4 3.2.1. Introduction.........................................................................................................3.4 3.2.2. Uniform Flow Relationships................................................................................3.5 3.2.3. Hydraulics in Steep, Alluvial Channels.................................................................3.6 3.2.3.1. Bedforms and Flow Regime ...........................................................................3.6 3.2.3.2. Resistance to Flow—General ..........................................................................3.7 SSCAFCA Sediment and Erosion Design Guide ii 3.2.3.3. Resistance to Flow in Sand-bed Channels.....................................................3.9 3.2.3.4. Normal Depth Calculations ............................................................................3.13 3.2.3.5. Water-surface Profiles..................................................................................3.14 3.2.3.6. Superelevation of Water Surface at Bends ....................................................3.14 3.2.3.7. Supercritical Flow in Natural Channels.........................................................3.15 3.3. Sediment Transport in Steep, Erodible Channels ....................................................3.16 3.3.1. Introduction.......................................................................................................3.16 3.3.2. Analysis of Bed and Bank Material...................................................................3.18 3.3.3. Bed Material in the SSCAFCA Area.................................................................3.19 3.3.4. Incipient Motion and Armoring..........................................................................3.22 3.3.5. Methods for Computing Bed Material Transport Capacity................................3.22 3.3.6. Bulking Factors for the SSCAFCA Area...........................................................3.23 3.4. Evaluation of Channel Adjustments .........................................................................3.27 3.4.1. Sediment Continuity .........................................................................................3.27 3.4.2. The Equilibrium Concept ..................................................................................3.27 Annual Sediment Yield and Dominant Discharge............................................. 3.28 3.4.3. Evaluation of Vertical Stability ..........................................................................3.29 3.4.3.1. Equilibrium Slope..........................................................................................3.30 3.4.3.2. An Alternative Approximation of the Equilibrium Slope ................................3.31 3.4.3.3. Contraction Scour.........................................................................................3.33 3.4.3.4. Antidune Scour.............................................................................................3.33 3.4.4. Sediment Transport and Channel Stability at Culverts.....................................3.34 3.4.4.1. Sediment Deposition Upstream of Culverts..................................................3.35 3.4.4.2. Sediment Transport in Culverts ....................................................................3.35 3.4.4.3. Degradation from Culverts............................................................................3.36 3.4.5. Evaluation of Lateral Stability and the LEE Line...............................................3.36 3.4.5.1. Bank Erosion Processes ..............................................................................3.36 3.4.5.2. Bank Stability Analysis Techniques..............................................................3.39 3.4.5.3. Lateral Erosion Envelope (The LEE Line) ....................................................3.43 3.4.5.4. Guidelines for Aggradational Channels ........................................................3.48 3.5. Local Scour...............................................................................................................3.49 3.5.1. Pier Scour at Bridge Crossings ........................................................................3.49 3.5.2. Scour at Grade-control Structures....................................................................3.53 3.5.3. Scour at Revetments, Spurs, and Abutments ..................................................3.55 3.5.4. Scour along a Floodwall ...................................................................................3.56 3.5.4.1. Flow Parallel to the Wall ................................................................................3.56 3.5.4.2. Flow Impinging on the Wall at an Angle .......................................................3.57 3.5.4.3. Scour along a Floodwall in Relation to Unconstrained Valley Width ............3.57 SSCAFCA Sediment and Erosion Design
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Coastal and Delta Flood Management
    INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT TOOLS SERIES COASTAL AND DELTA FLOOD MANAGEMENT ISSUE 17 MAY 2013 The Associated Programme on Flood Management (APFM) is a joint initiative of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the Global Water Partnership (GWP). It promotes the concept of Integrated Flood Management (IFM) as a new approach to flood management. The programme is financially supported by the governments of Japan, Switzerland and Germany. www.apfm.info The World Meteorological Organization is a Specialized Agency of the United Nations and represents the UN-System’s authoritative voice on weather, climate and water. It co-ordinates the meteorological and hydrological services of 189 countries and territories. www.wmo.int The Global Water Partnership is an international network open to all organizations involved in water resources management. It was created in 1996 to foster Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM). www.gwp.org Integrated Flood Management Tools Series No.17 © World Meteorological Organization, 2013 Cover photo: Westkapelle, Netherlands To the reader This publication is part of the “Flood Management Tools Series” being compiled by the Associated Programme on Flood Management. The “Coastal and Delta Flood Management” Tool is based on available literature, and draws findings from relevant works wherever possible. This Tool addresses the needs of practitioners and allows them to easily access relevant guidance materials. The Tool is considered as a resource guide/material for practitioners and not an academic paper. References used are mostly available on the Internet and hyperlinks are provided in the References section. This Tool is a “living document” and will be updated based on sharing of experiences with its readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Screening Of
    Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Avenue 54 to Thermal Drop Structure Draft Environmental Impact Report / State Clearinghouse No. 2015111067 Appendices APPENDIX C Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Phase I Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report City of Coachella and Unincorporated Community of Thermal Submitted to: Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc. 42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Submitted by: Amec Foster Wheeler, Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 3120 Chicago Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, CA 92507 3 February 2016 Coachella Valley Water District C-1 Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Phase I Biological Resources Assessment & Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Compliance Report City of Coachella and Unincorporated Community of Thermal Riverside County, California Submitted to: Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc. 42635 Melanie Place, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Contact: John Criste (760) 341-4800 [email protected] Submitted by: Amec Foster Wheeler, Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 3120 Chicago Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, CA 92507 Contact: John F. Green Senior Biologist (951) 369-8060 [email protected] 3 February 2016 Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel Improvement Project, Phase I Biological Resources Assessment & MSHCP Compliance Report February 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For the purposes of this assessment, analysis of the proposed Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (CVSC) Improvement Project, Phase I (project) could include the following: Extension of existing and construction of new concrete-lined channel/levee banks, a fully concrete-lined channel from Airport Boulevard to the Thermal Drop Structure near Avenue 58, and construction of a bypass channel or combinations thereto.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10 Open Channels
    Chapter 10 Open Channels Chapter 10 Open Channels Table of Contents 10-1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 10-1-1 Chapter Overview ............................................................................................................. 1 10-1-2 Design Flows .................................................................................................................... 1 10-1-3 Channel Types .................................................................................................................. 2 10-1-4 Sediment Loads ................................................................................................................ 5 10-1-5 Permitting and Regulations ............................................................................................... 6 10-2 Natural Stream Corridors ............................................................................................................... 7 10-2-1 Functions and Benefits of Natural Streams ...................................................................... 8 10-2-2 Effects of Urbanization ..................................................................................................... 9 10-2-3 Preserving Natural Stream Corridors .............................................................................. 11 10-3 Stream Restoration Principles .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson 4: Sediment Deposition and River Structures
    LESSON 4: SEDIMENT DEPOSITION AND RIVER STRUCTURES ESSENTIAL QUESTION: What combination of factors both natural and manmade is necessary for healthy river restoration and how does this enhance the sustainability of natural and human communities? GUIDING QUESTION: As rivers age and slow they deposit sediment and form sediment structures, how are sediments and sediment structures important to the river ecosystem? OVERVIEW: The focus of this lesson is the deposition and erosional effects of slow-moving water in low gradient areas. These “mature rivers” with decreasing gradient result in the settling and deposition of sediments and the formation sediment structures. The river’s fast-flowing zone, the thalweg, causes erosion of the river banks forming cliffs called cut-banks. On slower inside turns, sediment is deposited as point-bars. Where the gradient is particularly level, the river will branch into many separate channels that weave in and out, leaving gravel bar islands. Where two meanders meet, the river will straighten, leaving oxbow lakes in the former meander bends. TIME: One class period MATERIALS: . Lesson 4- Sediment Deposition and River Structures.pptx . Lesson 4a- Sediment Deposition and River Structures.pdf . StreamTable.pptx . StreamTable.pdf . Mass Wasting and Flash Floods.pptx . Mass Wasting and Flash Floods.pdf . Stream Table . Sand . Reflection Journal Pages (printable handout) . Vocabulary Notes (printable handout) PROCEDURE: 1. Review Essential Question and introduce Guiding Question. 2. Hand out first Reflection Journal page and have students take a minute to consider and respond to the questions then discuss responses and questions generated. 3. Handout and go over the Vocabulary Notes. Students will define the vocabulary words as they watch the PowerPoint Lesson.
    [Show full text]
  • Seasonal Flooding Affects Habitat and Landscape Dynamics of a Gravel
    Seasonal flooding affects habitat and landscape dynamics of a gravel-bed river floodplain Katelyn P. Driscoll1,2,5 and F. Richard Hauer1,3,4,6 1Systems Ecology Graduate Program, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana 59812 USA 2Rocky Mountain Research Station, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 USA 3Flathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana, Polson, Montana 59806 USA 4Montana Institute on Ecosystems, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana 59812 USA Abstract: Floodplains are comprised of aquatic and terrestrial habitats that are reshaped frequently by hydrologic processes that operate at multiple spatial and temporal scales. It is well established that hydrologic and geomorphic dynamics are the primary drivers of habitat change in river floodplains over extended time periods. However, the effect of fluctuating discharge on floodplain habitat structure during seasonal flooding is less well understood. We collected ultra-high resolution digital multispectral imagery of a gravel-bed river floodplain in western Montana on 6 dates during a typical seasonal flood pulse and used it to quantify changes in habitat abundance and diversity as- sociated with annual flooding. We observed significant changes in areal abundance of many habitat types, such as riffles, runs, shallow shorelines, and overbank flow. However, the relative abundance of some habitats, such as back- waters, springbrooks, pools, and ponds, changed very little. We also examined habitat transition patterns through- out the flood pulse. Few habitat transitions occurred in the main channel, which was dominated by riffle and run habitat. In contrast, in the near-channel, scoured habitats of the floodplain were dominated by cobble bars at low flows but transitioned to isolated flood channels at moderate discharge.
    [Show full text]
  • Sandbridge Beach FONSI
    FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Issuance of a Negotiated Agreement for Use of Outer Continental Shelf Sand from Sandbridge Shoal in the Sandbridge Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection Project Virginia Beach, Virginia Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508) and Department of the Interior (DOI) regulations implementing NEPA (43 CFR 46), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) prepared an environmental assessment (EA) to determine whether the issuance of a negotiated agreement for the use of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) sand from Sandbridge Shoal Borrow Areas A and B for the Sandbridge Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection Project near Virginia Beach, VA would have a significant effect on the human environment and whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) should be prepared. Several NEPA documents evaluating impacts of the project have been previously prepared by both the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and BOEM. The USACE described the affected environment, evaluated potential environmental impacts (initial construction and nourishment events), and considered alternatives to the proposed action in a 2009 EA. This EA was subsequently updated and adopted by BOEM in 2012 in association with the most recent 2013 Sandbridge nourishment effort (BOEM 2012). Prior to this, BOEM (previously Minerals Management Service [MMS]) was a cooperating agency on several EAs for previous projects (MMS 1997; MMS 2001; MMS 2006). This current EA, prepared by BOEM, supplements and summarizes the aforementioned 2012 analysis. BOEM has reviewed all prior analyses, supplemented additional information as needed, and determined that the potential impacts of the current proposed action have been adequately addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Depositional Signature of Strongly Aggradational Chute-And-Pool Bedforms
    Marine and River Dune Dynamics – MARID VI – 1-3 April 2019 - Bremen, Germany Build-up-and-fill structure: The depositional signature of strongly aggradational chute-and-pool bedforms Arnoud Slootman College of Petroleum Engineering & Geosciences, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia – [email protected] Matthieu J.B. Cartigny Department of Geography, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom – [email protected] Age J. Vellinga National Oceanography Centre, University of Southampton Waterfront Campus, Southampton, United Kingdom – [email protected] ABSTRACT: Chute -and -pools are unstable, hybrid bedforms of the upper flo w-regime, pop u- lating the stability field in between two stable end-members (antidunes and cyclic steps). Chute-and-pools are manifested by supercritical flow (chute) down the lee side and subcritical flow (pool) on the stoss side, linked through a hydraulic jump in the trough. The associated sedimentary structures reported here were generated at the toe-of-slope of a Pleistocene car- bonate platform dominated by resedimentation of skeletal sand and gravel by supercritical density underflows. It is shown that wave-breaking on growing antidunes occurred without destruction of the antidune like commonly observed for antidunes in subaerial flows. This led to the formation of chute-and-pools that were not preceded by intense upstream scouring, in- terpreted to be the result of high bed aggradation rates. The term aggradational chute-and- pool is proposed for these
    [Show full text]
  • Hooper Beach Dune Erosion Assessment Report
    Hoopers Beach Robe Dune Erosion Assessment Report Quality Information Document Draft Report Ref 2018-06 Date 17-10-18 Prepared by D Bowers Reviewed by D Bowers Revision History Revision Authorised Revision Details Date Name/Position Signature A 20-7-18 Draft report D Bowers/ Managing Director B 24-8-18 Draft Report D Bowers/ Managing Director C 17-10-18 Final Report D Bowers/ Managing Director 2 2018-06 Disclaimer The outcomes and findings of this report have in part been informed by information supplied by the client or third parties. Civil & Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd has not attempted to verify the accuracy of such client or third party information and shall be not be liable for any loss resulting from the client or any third parties’ reliance on that information. 3 2018-06 Table of Contents Quality Information 2 Revision History 2 Disclaimer 3 1. Background 5 2. Assessment Methodology 6 Site Inspection & Site Observations 7 Discussions with Key Stakeholders 14 Client 14 DEW 15 Coastal Processes 15 Reference Document Review 15 Wind Patterns 16 Waves 18 5.3.1 Swell Waves 18 5.3.2 Wind waves 18 Sea levels including storm surge and sea level rise 20 5.4.1 Existing Climatic Conditions 20 5.4.2 Future Climatic Conditions 21 2050 Projections 21 2100 Projections 22 Erosion 22 5.5.1 Coastal Erosion and Recession 22 Short-term Storm Erosion 24 5.5.2 Long Term Recession 24 5.5.3 Recession due to Sea Level Rise (future climate) 27 5.5.4 Total estimated coastal recession 28 5.5.5 Causes of Current Accelerated Dune Erosion 29 Coastal Hazards Risk Assessment 29 Coastal Hazards 29 6.1.1 Current Hazards & Risks (0-10 years) 29 6.1.2 Future Hazards & Risk (Beyond 10 years) 29 6.1.3 Likelihood Consequence & Risk Rating 30 Potential Management Options 30 Short Term Management Options 31 Long Term Management Options 31 7.2.1 Soft Engineering Options 31 7.2.2 Hard Engineering Options 32 Development Plan Provisions 35 Conclusions 36 Recommendations 38 Appendix A 39 4 2018-06 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Felixstowe Central and South
    Management Responsibilities SCDC: Fel 19.1 to Fel 19.3 SCDC Assets: Fel 19.1 Reinforced concrete block revetment with groynes, rock armour revetment in front of concrete wall, two fishtail breakwaters Fel 19.2 Concrete seawall with rock groynes, concrete splash wall, mass concrete seawall with promenade, timber groynes with concrete cladding Fel 19.3 Mass concrete sea wall with promenade, timber groynes with concrete cladding EA: Fel 19.4 to Fel 20.1 (with flood wall responsibility in SCDC frontages) EA Assets: Fel 19.2 / 19.3 Secondary flood wall Fel 19.4 Manor Terrace sea wall, concrete block-work revetment with toe piling, Landguard Common sea wall with concrete apron SMP Information Area vulnerable to flood risk: Approx. 7,017,000m² No. of properties vulnerable to flooding: 1071 Area vulnerable to erosion: Approx. 640,000m² (2105 prediction – no defences) No. of properties vulnerable to erosion: 111 Vulnerable infrastructure / assets: Felixstowe Leisure Centre, Bartlet Hospital, Felixstowe Docks, Martello Tower, Landguard caravan park, Harwich Harbour Ferry, Landguard Common, Landguard Fort, Orwell Estuary, Stour Estuary SMP Objectives To improve Felixstowe as a viable commercial centre and tourist destination in a sustainable manner; To protect the port of Felixstowe and provide opportunities for its development; To develop and maintain the Blue Flag beach; To maintain flood protection to residential properties; To maintain a high standard of ongoing defence to the area; To maintain existing facilities essential in supporting ongoing regeneration; To integrate maintenance of coastal defence, while promoting sustainable development of the hinterland; To maintain the historical heritage of the frontage; To maintain biological and geological features of Landguard Common SSSI in a favourable condition.
    [Show full text]
  • URBAN COASTAL FLOOD MITIGATION STRATEGIES for the CITY of HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY by Eleni Athanasopoulou
    ©[2017] Eleni Athanasopoulou ALL RIGHTS RESERVED URBAN COASTAL FLOOD MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR THE CITY OF HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY By Eleni Athanasopoulou A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School- New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey In partial fulfillment of requirements For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Civil and Environmental Engineering Written under the direction of Dr. Qizhong Guo And approved by New Jersey, New Brunswick January 2017 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION URBAN COASTAL FLOOD MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR THE CITY OF HOBOKEN & JERSEY CITY, NEW JERSEY by ELENI ATHANASOPOULOU Dissertation Director: Dr. Qizhong Guo Coastal cities are undeniably vulnerable to climate change. Coastal storms combining with sea level rise have increased the risk of flooding and storm surge damage in coastal communities. The communities of the City of Hoboken and Jersey City are low-lying areas along the Hudson River waterfront and the Newark Bay/Hackensack River with little or no relief. Flooding in these areas is a result of intense precipitation and runoff, tides and/or storm surges, or a combination of all of them. During Super-storm Sandy these communities experienced severe flooding and flood-related damage as a result of the storm surge. ii Following the damage that was created on these communities by flooding from Sandy, this research was initiated in order to develop comprehensive strategies to make Hoboken and Jersey City more resilient to flooding. Commonly used flood measures like storage, surge barrier, conveyance, diversion, pumping, rainfall interception, etc. are examined, and the research is focused on their different combination to address different levels of flood risk at different scales.
    [Show full text]
  • River Dynamics 101 - Fact Sheet River Management Program Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
    River Dynamics 101 - Fact Sheet River Management Program Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Overview In the discussion of river, or fluvial systems, and the strategies that may be used in the management of fluvial systems, it is important to have a basic understanding of the fundamental principals of how river systems work. This fact sheet will illustrate how sediment moves in the river, and the general response of the fluvial system when changes are imposed on or occur in the watershed, river channel, and the sediment supply. The Working River The complex river network that is an integral component of Vermont’s landscape is created as water flows from higher to lower elevations. There is an inherent supply of potential energy in the river systems created by the change in elevation between the beginning and ending points of the river or within any discrete stream reach. This potential energy is expressed in a variety of ways as the river moves through and shapes the landscape, developing a complex fluvial network, with a variety of channel and valley forms and associated aquatic and riparian habitats. Excess energy is dissipated in many ways: contact with vegetation along the banks, in turbulence at steps and riffles in the river profiles, in erosion at meander bends, in irregularities, or roughness of the channel bed and banks, and in sediment, ice and debris transport (Kondolf, 2002). Sediment Production, Transport, and Storage in the Working River Sediment production is influenced by many factors, including soil type, vegetation type and coverage, land use, climate, and weathering/erosion rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Scour and Fill in Ephemeral Streams
    SCOUR AND FILL IN EPHEMERAL STREAMS by Michael G. Foley , , " W. M. Keck Laboratory of Hydraulics and Water Resources Division of Engineering and Applied Science CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Pasadena, California 91125 Report No. KH-R-33 November 1975 SCOUR AND FILL IN EPHEMERAL STREAMS by Michael G. Foley Project Supervisors: Robert P. Sharp Professor of Geology and Vito A. Vanoni Professor of Hydraulics Technical Report to: U. S. Army Research Office, Research Triangle Park, N. C. (under Grant No. DAHC04-74-G-0189) and National Science Foundation (under Grant No. GK3l802) Contribution No. 2695 of the Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology W. M. Keck Laboratory of Hydraulics and Water Resources Division of Engineering and Applied Science California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 91125 Report No. KH-R-33 November 1975 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer would like to express his deep appreciation to his advisor, Dr. Robert P. Sharp, for suggesting this project and providing patient guidance, encouragement, support, and kind criticism during its execution. Similar appreciation is due Dr. Vito A. Vanoni for his guidance and suggestions, and for generously sharing his great experience with sediment transport problems and laboratory experiments. Drs. Norman H. Brooks and C. Hewitt Dix read the first draft of this report, and their helpful comments are appreciated. Mr. Elton F. Daly was instrumental in the design of the laboratory apparatus and the success of the laboratory experiments. Valuable assistance in the field was given by Mrs. Katherine E. Foley and Mr. Charles D. Wasserburg. Laboratory experiments were conducted with the assistance of Ms.
    [Show full text]