Chapter-Ill Analysis of River Longitudinal Profiles 121
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
120 Chapter-Ill Analysis of river longitudinal profiles 121 Chapter III ANALYSIS OF RIVER LONGITUDINAL PROFILES 3.1. Introduction: Rivers are the most sensitive and dynamic elements of the landscape. The shape of the longitudinal profile of a river is result of the complex interplay between lithology, structure, tectonics, climate and catchment hydrology. In a large number of studies, the river longitudinal profiles have been investigated in order to identify the areas experiencing tectonic deformation and uplift (Begin, 1975; Seeber and Gornitz, 1983; Rice and Church, 2001; Chen et al., 2006; Lee and Tsai, 2009; Whittaker, 2012 and the references therein). In addition to this, the influence of climate and hydrological processes on the longitudinal profiles of the rivers has been investigated (Roe et al., 2002; Zaprowski et al., 2005). Other studies concerned with the long profile analysis include understanding of the role of lithology (Begin, 1975; Bishop et al., 1985; Goldrick and Bishop, 1995), distribution of stream power (Sklar and Dietrich, 1998; Snyder et al., 2000), identification of knick zones (Perez-Pena et al., 2009; Pederson and Tressler, 2012) and description of long profile shape (Shepherd, 1985; Rice and Church, 2001). In this chapter, the characteristics of the longitudinal profiles of the rivers of the Kaveri, Palar and Ponnaiyar Basins and their tributaries are described and an attempt is made to understand whether there is any effect of tectonics on their long profiles as suggested by Valdiya (2001). 3.2. Methodology: In all, the longitudinal profiles of 21 major tributaries of the Kaveri River, 8 tributaries of the Palar and 6 tributaries of the Ponnaiyar River, as well as the profiles of the main channels of the Kaveri, Palar and Ponnaiyar Rivers were extracted and analysed in ArcGIS. For extracting the longitudinal profiles of these streams, the SRTM-DEM data have been processed in an ArcGIS environment. To generate the long profiles of the rivers from SRTM-DEM data, the following procedure was adopted: 122 Streams were identified using the ‘Hydrology’ Routine in the ArcGIS software. These streams were divided into segments of 100 m length. This is in accordance with the resolution of SRTM data (90-m) so as to ensure that the same cell was not extracted for two points. These stream segments were converted into points and only the end points of each segment were extracted to the newly created point file. The elevation of each point along with its x-y coordinates were extracted by the “Feature to DEM” routine of ArcGIS. The data obtained were exported to the Microsoft Excel for fiirther analysis. Using the distance formula (Eq. 3.1), the distances of the extracted points ft'om one another was computed. = + (^2 ~yif Eq. 3.1 where, d = distance between points X| and X2, xi = x-coordinate (in meters) of point Xi, yi = y-coordinate (in meters) of point yi, X2 = x-coordinate of point xi, y: = y-coordinate of point y2. The distances were then cumulated taking the source as origin (zero) and then the distances of all the points fi-om the source of the river were obtained. Due to stepping in the adjacent elevations and the effect of water bodies (dams), the long profiles derived ft-om DEM are not as smooth and accurate as those produced ft'om other techniques (Snyder et al., 2000), especially for low-gradient reaches. In the present study, first the artificial spikes were deleted and smoothing of the long profiles using a 11-elevation points moving average (5 points upstream and 5 points downstream), was carried out. The distance and the elevation data were used for calculating the Hack’s stream gradient index (SL), stream profile concavity and profile steepness. In addition, the variations in the long profile form were evaluated by curve fitting. The normalized stream profiles and normalized SL were also considered for understanding the long profile characteristics of the stream under review. 3.3. Description of the long profile forms: The longitudinal profiles of the rivers reflect the combined effect of present and past geomorphic processes in the basin. Steady-state systems are characterized by a state of equilibrium between the rates of uplift and denudation. Thus, abrupt changes in slope along 123 river profiles may indicate disequilibrium conditions associated with lithology (Hack. 1973) or active faults that cross these rivers (Seeber and Gomitz, 1983). In the case of the tributaries of the Kaveri, Palar and Ponnaiyar Rivers, although the longitudinal profiles are broadly concave-upward, linearity, convexity and breaks in slope are quite evident (Figs. 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3). This clearly indicates that the rivers of this ancient landscape are not graded, as expected. H e m a v a t h i Lakatiam ahantirtha E E § 1 ()0 2iK) 3(X) D istance fr(»m the s<»urce(kiii) D istance from the source(km ) K a b b i n i Suvarnavati 8 0 0 -I lO (X ) - B 8(X ) - 7 0 0 - 6CX) - 4(X ) 50 lOO 150 2(K) O 20 40 60 80 lOO D istance from the s«»urce(km) D istance from the source(kxn) S h i m s h a A r k a v a t h i a lOO 200 3(X) 5 0 lO O 1 5 0 200 D istance from the source(km ) D istance from source (km) Dodda Halla 1 .S 'SS D istance from the source(km ) D istance fr<»m the source(km ) Fig. 3.1. A. Longitudinal profiles of the major tributaries of the Kaveri River. 124 Chinnar Palar E co .S £ Distance from the source(lun) Distance from the source(km) Nagavathi B E Distance from the source(km) Distance from the source(km) Bhavani 'S •S Distance from the source(icm) Distance from the source(km) Am ravati E g > u Distance from the source(lun) Distance from the source (km) Fig. 3.1. B. Longitudinal profiles of the major tributaries of the Kaveri River 125 Distance from the source(km) Distance from the source(km) E E >es Distance from the source(km) Distance from the source(km) E e Distance from the source(km) Distance from the source(km) Fig. 3.1. C. Longitudinal profiles of the major tributaries and the main channel of the Kaveri River 126 Distance from the source(km) Distance from the source(km) Distance from the source(m) Poini Cheyyar Distance from the source (km) Distance from the source (km) Tenneri Palar Channel Distance from the source (km) Distance from the source (km) Fig. 3.2. Longitudinal profiles of the major rivers of the Palar Basin 127 E c i Distance from the source(km) Distance from the sourcedtm) Distance from the source (km) Distance from the source (km) .S I s Distance from the source (km) Distance from the source (km) Fig. 3.3. Longitudinal profiles of the major rivers of the Ponnaiyar Basin 128 Tributaries in the middle domain of the Kaveri Basin notably the Arkavathi, Shimsha and Chinnar as well as the Nagavathi River in the lower domain, particularly show deviation from the normal concave steady-state profile. Furthermore, the long profiles of the Amaravati and Bhavani Rivers in the lower domain of the Kaveri Basin are characterized by remarkably steep upper segments (Fig. 3. IB). This implies a rapid decline in channel slope and associated unit stream power in the headwaters of these tributaries. The main channel of the Kaveri River shows noteworthy absence of steeper upper segment. It has been stated earlier that the Kaveri originates over the Mysore Plateau and descends to the Tamil Nadu Plains before being deeply entrenched into bedrock in its middle course between Shivasamudram and Hogenakkal Falls. The long profiles of most of the tributaries of the Palar and Ponnaiyar Rivers as well as the tributaries in the lower domain of the Kaveri Basin also do not exhibit the typical concave-up profile, one would expect in the case of the rivers draining areas characterized by tectonic stability or uniform lithology or an ancient landscape. 3.4. Normalized Longitudinal Profiles: It is likely that the slight to noteworthy differences in the long profile shapes (Figs. 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3) may be also due to the differences in basin relief and size (surrogate for power and discharge). Therefore, the long profile length and relief were normalized to minimize the effects of these two variables and highlight the effects of tectonics and/or lithology. The elevations and distances were divided by the head (i.e. maximum basin relief) and the total stream length, respectively to normalize the long profiles (Seidl et al., 1994; Lee and Tsai, 2009) (Fig. 3.4). The normalized longitudinal profiles of the streams (Hemavathi, Kabbini, Suvarnavati and Lakahamahantirtha) in the upper domain of the Kaveri Basin (Fig. 3.4 A), display slight change in channel-bed elevation with distance. This is the typical property of the rivers originating over plateaux characterized by nearly flat terrain. These rivers originate on the Mysore Plateau and meet the Kaveri while on plateau without descending onto the plains. Hence, steep segments and knick points are absent. 129 The middle domain of the Kaveri Basin is characterized by tributaries meeting the Kaveri within the gorge section between Shivasamudram to Hogenakkal Falls (e.g. Shimsha, Arkavathi, Chinnar, Dodda Halla and Thattai Halla). Hence, these rivers exhibit knick points or breaks in their longitudinal profiles (Fig. 3.4 B). This is due to the fact that most of these rivers flow through an area which is controlled by the structural fabric.