Next Article in Journal
Uncertainty Analysis of a Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Model
Previous Article in Journal
Water Resources Allocation in Transboundary River Based on Asymmetric Nash–Harsanyi Leader–Follower Game Model
Article Menu
Issue 3 (March) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2018, 10(3), 271; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030271

Evaluation and Comparison of Extremal Hypothesis-Based Regime Methods

1
College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
2
State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Nanjing 210098, China
3
National Engineering Research Center for Water Resources Efficient Utilization and Engineering Safety, Nanjing 210098, China
4
Key Laboratory of Integrated Regulation and Resource Development of Shallow Lakes, Ministry of Education, College of Environment, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 18 January 2018 / Revised: 19 February 2018 / Accepted: 19 February 2018 / Published: 4 March 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [7486 KB, uploaded 20 March 2018]   |  

Abstract

Regime channels are important for stable canal design and to determine river response to environmental changes, e.g., due to the construction of a dam, land use change, and climate shifts. A plethora of methods is available describing the hydraulic geometry of alluvial rivers in the regime. However, comparison of these methods using the same set of data seems lacking. In this study, we evaluate and compare four different extremal hypothesis-based regime methods, namely minimization of Froude number (MFN), maximum entropy and minimum energy dissipation rate (ME and MEDR), maximum flow efficiency (MFE), and Millar’s method, by dividing regime channel data into sand and gravel beds. The results show that for sand bed channels MFN gives a very high accuracy of prediction for regime channel width and depth. For gravel bed channels we find that MFN and ‘ME and MEDR’ give a very high accuracy of prediction for width and depth. Therefore the notion that extremal hypotheses which do not contain bank stability criteria are inappropriate for use is shown false as both MFN and ‘ME and MEDR’ lack bank stability criteria. Also, we find that bank vegetation has significant influence in the prediction of hydraulic geometry by MFN and ‘ME and MEDR’. View Full-Text
Keywords: hydraulic geometry; extremal hypothesis; bank strength; regime channels hydraulic geometry; extremal hypothesis; bank strength; regime channels
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Joshi, I.; Dai, W.; Bilal, A.; Upreti, A.R.; He, Z. Evaluation and Comparison of Extremal Hypothesis-Based Regime Methods. Water 2018, 10, 271.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top