# Influence of Vegetation Coverage on Hydraulic Characteristics of Overland Flow

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. Experimental Design

^{®}(Figure 1). The dimensions of the flume were 4.5 m × 0.3 m × 0.25 m (length × width × height). A 40-grit water sandpaper was placed on the bottom of the flume to simulate slope surface roughness and to ensure stability of the underlying surface during the test. Starting from the flume entrance, the 1-m upstream section represents a bare slope, and the 3-m middle section represents a slope covered with vegetation. A total of seven observation sections (one in the upstream of the vegetation section, five in the vegetation section, and one in the downstream) were arranged. All the observation sections were equipped with two ultrasonic water level sensors (Sinomeasure SIN-DP, Hangzhou China).

^{2}/s to 0.00167 m

^{2}/s in this test.

#### 2.2. Simulation Accuracy Evaluation Method

#### 2.2.1. Nash–Sutcliffe Efficiency

#### 2.2.2. Regression Analysis

^{2}reflects the goodness-of-fit of the regression equation, which can be used to determine the fitting quality of the regression. If its value is close to one, the fitting effect is good; otherwise, the fitting effect is poor. The corresponding equation is as follows:

#### 2.2.3. Root Mean Square Error

_{i}is the predicted value of the sample, y

_{i}is its observed value, and n is the number of samples.

#### 2.2.4. Mean Absolute Error

## 3. Results

#### 3.1. Hydraulic Parameters under Various Degrees of Vegetation Coverage

^{2}/s to 0.00167 m

^{2}/s, overland flow water depth under vegetation cover can reach depths of up to 8.11 mm, and the depth values are all higher than those without vegetation cover. As the vegetation coverage increases, the average water flow velocity slows down. On the bare slope, the flow velocity is between 0.168 and 0.447 m/s; when the degree of coverage is 9.76%, the flow velocity decreases to 0.158–0.395 m/s; and when the degree of coverage increases to 95.01%, the flow velocity can drop to 0.105–0.206 m/s. In addition, the range of Reynolds number under vegetation cover is 243.38–1460.31. It is observed that the Froude number decreases with an increase in the degree of vegetation coverage, from 1.32–2.34 (without vegetation cover) to 0.65–0.73.

#### 3.2. Influence of Vegetation Coverage on Water Path and Flow Velocity

#### 3.3. Relationship between Darcy Resistance Coefficient and Vegetation Coverage

#### 3.4. Relationship between Manning Coefficient and Vegetation Coverage

#### 3.5. Analysis of Darcy Resistance Coefficient

#### 3.5.1. Relationship between Darcy Resistance Coefficient and Reynolds Number

#### 3.5.2. Relationship between Darcy Resistance Coefficient and Submergence Degree

#### 3.5.3. Influence of Flow Rate and Degree of Coverage on Ratio of Form Resistance

^{2}/s to 0.00083 m

^{2}/s, the ratio of form resistance increases from 0.176 to 0.521; however, as the flow rate continues to increase to 0.00167 m

^{2}/s, form resistance gradually drops to 0.309. When the degree of vegetation coverage is relatively high, the ratio of form resistance in the total water flow resistance increases with an increase in the flow rate, and the rate of increase gradually decreases with an increase in the density. For example, when the degree of vegetation coverage is 85.72%, as the unit discharge increases from 0.00028 to 0.00167 m

^{2}/s, the ratio of form resistance gradually increases from 0.663 to 0.874, which shows an increase of 0.211. However, when the degree of coverage is 95.01%, within the same range of flow rate, the ratio of form resistance increases from 0.758 to 0.903, which represents an increase of only 0.145.

#### 3.6. Empirical Formula for Resistance Coefficient

## 4. Discussion

#### 4.1. Experimental Phenomena during Vegetation Submergence

#### 4.2. Influence of Vegetation Coverage on Water Depth and Flow Velocity

#### 4.3. Flow Regime of Overland Flow under Vegetation Cover

#### 4.4. Resistance Generation Mechanism under Different Degrees of Vegetation Coverage

#### 4.5. Effects of Vegetation Coverage Change on Surface Runoff

#### 4.6. Evaluation and Analysis of Proposed Equation

## 5. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Institutional Review Board Statement

## Informed Consent Statement

## Data Availability Statement

## Conflicts of Interest

## Appendix A

#### Calculation of Hydraulic Parameters

^{3}/s; B is the flume width (0.3 m in this test); and h is the average water depth of the sections, in m.

^{3}/s, which can be calculated using the Poiseuille formula as follows:

^{2}).

## References

- Fu, B.; Wang, S.; Liu, Y.; Liu, J.; Liang, W.; Miao, C. Hydrogeomorphic ecosystem responses to natural and anthropogenic changes in the Loess Plateau of China. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci.
**2017**, 45, 223–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sun, W.; Shao, Q.; Liu, J. Soil erosion and its response to the changes of precipitation and vegetation coverage on the Loess Plateau. J. Geogr. Sci.
**2013**, 23, 1091–1106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, Y.; Wang, K.; Lin, Y.; Shi, W.; Song, Y.; He, X. Balancing green and grain trade. Nat. Geosci.
**2015**, 8, 739–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, K.D.; Wang, G.Q.; Sun, X.M.; Wang, J.J. Hydraulic characteristic of overland flow under different vegetation coverage. Adv. Water Sci.
**2014**, 25, 825–834. [Google Scholar] - Zhao, C.H.; Gao, J.E.; Zhang, M.J.; Wang, F.; Zhang, T. Sediment deposition and overland flow hydraulics in simulated vegetative filter strips under varying vegetation covers. Hydrol. Process.
**2016**, 30, 163–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Srivastava, A.; Kumari, N.; Maza, M. Hydrological response to agricultural land use heterogeneity using variable infiltration capacity model. Water Resour. Manag.
**2020**, 34, 3779–3794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, M.; Yao, W.Y.; Li, Z.B. Progress of the effect of grassland vegetation for conserving soil and water on loess plateau. Adv. Earth Sci.
**2005**, 20, 74–80. [Google Scholar] - Foster, G.R.; Huggins, L.F.; Meyer, L.D. A laboratory study of rill hydraulics: I. Velocity relationships. Trans. ASAE
**1984**, 27, 790–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Foster, G.R.; Huggins, L.F.; Meyer, L.D. A Laboratory Study of Rill Hydraulics: II. Shear Stress Relationships. Trans. ASAE
**1984**, 27, 797–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Abrahams, A.D.; Li, G.; Parsons, A.J. Rill hydraulics on a semiarid hillslope, southern Arizona. Earth Surf. Process. Landf.
**1996**, 21, 35–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Selby, M.J. Hillslope Materials and Processes; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Pute, W.; Peihua, Z. Research on the laminar flow type and erosion transportation manners on the slope surface. J. Soil Water. Conserv.
**1992**, 6, 16–24. [Google Scholar] - Horton, R.E. Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; Hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.
**1945**, 56, 275–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Zhang, G. Study on hydraulic properties of shallow flow. Adv. Water Sci.
**2002**, 13, 159–165. [Google Scholar] - Wu, Q.; Wu, F.; Wang, L. Hydrodynamic characteristics of overland flow under soil crusts condition. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng.
**2014**, 30, 73–80. [Google Scholar] - Pan, C.Z.; Shangguan, Z.P. Runoff hydraulic characteristics and sediment generation in sloped grassplots under simulated rainfall conditions. J. Hydrol.
**2006**, 331, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cao, Y.; Zhang, G.H.; Tang, K.M.; Luo, R. Experiment on the effect of simulated surface cover on the overland flow velocity. J. Mt. Sci.
**2011**, 29, 654–659. [Google Scholar] - Järvelä, J. Flow resistance of flexible and stiff vegetation: A flume study with natural plants. J. Hydrol.
**2002**, 269, 44–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ling, H.; Guo, B.; Xu, H.; Fu, J. Configuration of water resources for a typical river basin in an arid region of China based on the ecological water requirements (EWRs) of desert riparian vegetation. Glob. Planet. Change
**2014**, 122, 292–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jiang, C.B.; Long, Y.N.; Hu, S.X.; Peng, Y.P. Recent progress in studies of overland flow resistance. J. Hydraul. Eng.
**2012**, 43, 189–197. [Google Scholar] - Zhang, K.; Wang, Z.; Wang, G.; Sun, X.; Cui, N. Overland-flow resistance characteristics of nonsubmerged vegetation. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng.
**2017**, 143, 04017021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Smith, M.W. Applying flow resistance equations to overland flows. Prog. Phys. Geogr.
**2007**, 31, 363–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ogunlela, A.O.; Makanjuola, M.B. Hydraulic roughness of some African grasses. J. Agric. Eng. Res.
**2000**, 75, 221–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wang, P.-F.; Wang, C.; Zhu, D.Z. Hydraulic resistance of submerged vegetation related to effective height. J. Hydrodyn. Ser. B
**2010**, 22, 265–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, G.X.; Yao, W.Y. Effect of rainfall on hydraulic resistance of shallow flow. Adv. Water Sci.
**1996**, 7, 42–46. [Google Scholar] - Noarayanan, L.; Murali, K.; Sundar, V. Performance of flexible emergent vegetation in staggered configuration as a mitigation for extreme coastal disasters. Nat. Hazards
**2012**, 62, 531–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, G. Preliminary study of the interference of surface objects and rainfall in overland flow resistance. Catena
**2009**, 78, 154–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Blöschl, G.; Bierkens, M.F.P.; Chambel, A.; Cudennec, C.; Destouni, G.; Fiori, A.; Kirchner, J.W.; McDonnell, J.J.; Savenije, H.H.G.; Sivapalan, M.; et al. Twenty-three unsolved problems in hydrology(UPH)-A community perspective. Hydrol Sci. J.
**2019**, 64, 1141–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Paniconi, C.; Putti, M. Physically based modeling in catchment hydrology at 50: Survey and outlook. Water Resour. Res.
**2015**, 51, 7090–7129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Paul, P.K.; Kumari, N.; Panigrahi, N.; Mishra, A.; Singh, R. Implementation of cell-to-cell routing scheme in a large scale conceptual hydrological model. Environ. Modell. Softw.
**2018**, 101, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Che, T.; Li, X.; Liu, S.; Li, H.; Xu, J.; Tan, J.; Zhang, Y.; Ren, Z.; Xiao, L.; Jin, R.; et al. Integrated hydrometeorological, snow and frozen-ground observations in the alpine region of the Heihe River Basin, China. Earth Syst. Sci. Data
**2019**, 11, 1483–1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Cheng, G.; Li, X.; Zhao, W.; Xu, Z.; Feng, Q.; Xiao, S.; Xiao, H. Integrated study of the water-ecosystem-economy in the Heihe River Basin. Natl. Sci. Rev.
**2014**, 1, 413–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Pan, C.Z.; Shangguan, Z.P. Experimental study on influence of rainfall and slope gradient on overland shallow flow hydraulics. J. Basic Sci. Eng.
**2009**, 17, 843–851. [Google Scholar] - Jiao, J.Y.; Wang, W.Z. Non-uniformity of spatial distribution of rainfall on the Loess Plateau. Hydrology
**2001**, 2, 20–24. [Google Scholar] - Zhang, K.D.; Wang, G.Q.; Lv, H.X.; Wang, Z.L. Discussion on flow pattern determination method of shallow flow on the slope surface. J. Exp. Fluid Mech.
**2011**, 25, 67–73. [Google Scholar] - Rauws, G. Laboratory experiments on resistance to overland flow due to composite roughness. J. Hydrol.
**1988**, 103, 37–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhao, C.H.; Gao, J.E.; Huang, Y.; Wang, G.; Zhang, M. Effects of vegetation stems on hydraulics of overland flow under varying water discharges. Land Degrad. Dev.
**2016**, 27, 748–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yan, X.F.; Zhou, S.F.; Huang, E.; Liu, X.N.; Wang, X.K. Experimental study on the effects of vegetation on hydraulic characteristics of overland flow. J. Sichuan Univ. Eng. Sci. Edit.
**2012**, 44, 26–30. [Google Scholar] - Lawrence, D.S.L. Macroscale surface roughness and frictional resistance in overland flow. Earth Surf. Process. Landf.
**1997**, 22, 365–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhang, G.; Liu, G.; Yi, L.; Zhang, P. Effects of patterned Artemisia capillaries on overland flow resistance under varied rainfall intensities in the Loess Plateau of China. J. Hydrol. Hydromech.
**2014**, 62, 334–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Wu, F.-C.; Shen, H.W.; Chou, Y.-J. Variation of Roughness Coefficients for Unsubmerged and Submerged Vegetation. J. Hydraul. Eng.
**1999**, 125, 934–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Ishikawa, Y.; Mizuhara, K.; Ashida, S. Effect of density of trees on drag exerted on trees in river channels. J. For. Res.
**2000**, 5, 271–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Tanino, Y.; Nepf, H.M. Laboratory investigation of mean drag in a random array of rigid, emergent cylinders. J. Hydraul. Eng.
**2008**, 134, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Dunkerley, D.; Domelow, P.; Tooth, D. Frictional retardation of laminar flow by plant litter and surface stones on dryland surfaces: A laboratory study. Water Resour. Res.
**2001**, 37, 1417–1423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Yi, L.; Ming’an, S. Hydro-dynamic parameters of overland flow during laboratory rainfall experiments under grass coverage. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng.
**2008**, 10, 1–5. [Google Scholar] - Wu, S.F.; Wu, P.T.; Feng, H.; Li, M. Effects of forage grass on the reduction of runoff and sediment and the hydrodynamic characteristic mechanism of slope runoff in the standard slope plot. J. Beijing For. Univ.
**2007**, 29, 99–104. [Google Scholar] - Rujner, H.; Leonhardt, G.; Marsalek, J. High-resolution modelling of the grass swale response to runoff inflows with Mike SHE. J. Hydrol.
**2018**, 562, 411–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Guo, J.K.; Yu, B.Q.; Zhang, Y.; Che, S. Predicted models for potential canopy rainfall interception capacity of landscape trees in Shanghai, China. Eur. J. Forest. Res.
**2017**, 136, 387–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Espeland, E.K.; Emery, N.C.; Mercer, K.L.; Woolbright, S.A.; Kettenring, K.M.; Gepts, P.; Etterson, J.R. Evolution of plant materials for ecological restoration: Insights from the applied and basic literature. J. Appl. Ecol.
**2017**, 54, 102–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sun, X.P.; Zhang, Y.L.; Shen, Y.; Randhir, T.O. Exploring ecosystem services and scenario simulation in the headwaters of Qiantang River watershed of China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
**2019**, 26, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**Test device (the device was developed and setup by the authors in Key Laboratory of Agricultural Soil and Water Engineering of the Ministry of Education in Arid Areas).

**Figure 3.**Flow velocity measurement using potassium permanganate (

**a**) at the start of the experiment and (

**b**) after 0.79 s.

**Figure 8.**Relationship between resistance coefficient (f) and Reynolds number (Re): (

**a**) without vegetation cover; (

**b**) with vegetation cover.

**Figure 9.**Relationship between resistance coefficient (f) and submergence degree ($\Lambda $): (

**a**) without vegetation cover; (

**b**) with vegetation cover.

**Figure 11.**The process of vegetation being submerged for (

**a**) 9.76%, (

**b**) 19.97%, (

**c**) 47.66%, and (

**d**) 66.42% vegetation coverage.

Coverage Treatment (%) | Unit Discharge (m^{2}/s) | Water Depth (mm) | Flow Velocity (m/s) | Reynolds Number | Froude Number | Resistance Coefficient |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

0 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 1.65–3.73 | 0.168–0.447 | 243.38–1460.31 | 1.32–2.34 | 0.30–0.95 |

9.76 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 1.76–4.22 | 0.158–0.395 | 243.38–1460.31 | 1.20–1.94 | 0.44–1.15 |

19.97 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 1.80–4.41 | 0.154–0.378 | 243.38–1460.31 | 1.16–1.80 | 0.50–1.23 |

38.78 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 1.83–4.70 | 0.152–0.355 | 243.38–1460.31 | 1.13–1.65 | 0.61–1.30 |

47.66 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 1.94–4.71 | 0.143–0.354 | 243.38–1460.31 | 1.03–1.64 | 0.61–1.54 |

66.42 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 1.97–6.01 | 0.141–0.277 | 243.38–1460.31 | 1.01–1.14 | 1.23–1.62 |

76.73 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 2.22–6.79 | 0.125–0.245 | 243.38–1460.31 | 0.84–0.95 | 1.84–2.31 |

85.72 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 2.37–7.44 | 0.117–0.224 | 243.38–1460.31 | 0.77–0.83 | 2.42–2.82 |

95.01 | 0.000278–0.00167 | 2.65–8.11 | 0.105–0.206 | 243.38–1460.31 | 0.65–0.73 | 3.13–3.94 |

Study | Characteristic Lengths | Reynolds Number |
---|---|---|

Wu et al. 1999 | Normalized flow depth (D/T) a) Unsubmerged vegetation D/T = 0.6–1.0; b) submerged vegetation D/T = 1.0–7.4 | 20–3000 |

Ishikawa et al. 2000 | Solid volume fraction ($\mathsf{\Phi}$) Laboratory measurements are presented for $\mathsf{\Phi}$= 0.091 (Square);$\mathsf{\Phi}$= 0.15 (Left triangle); $\mathsf{\Phi}$ = 0.20 (Cross);$\mathsf{\Phi}$= 0.27 (Hexagram);$\mathsf{\Phi}$= 0.35 (Circle) | 25–685 |

Tanino and Nepf 2008 | Diameter of model tree (d) Model trees with different diameters (0.40 and 0.64) were used to set two different spacing (6.32 and 3.16) for comparison | <5000 |

Coverage Degree (%) | Q/(L/min) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

5 | 6.4 | 10 | 12.5 | 15 | 20 | 30 | |

0 | 29.65 | 25.28 | 17.33 | 15.23 | 13.88 | 12.27 | 10.07 |

9.76 | 31.39 | 26.98 | 20.25 | 20.54 | 22.09 | 17.50 | 12.69 |

19.97 | 29.16 | 25.92 | 18.52 | 19.83 | 20.68 | 16.44 | 11.39 |

38.78 | 26.73 | 25.09 | 18.63 | 19.38 | 19.87 | 15.59 | 11.91 |

47.66 | 28.51 | 27.28 | 20.53 | 18.85 | 17.73 | 14.38 | 12.72 |

66.42 | 31.91 | 30.24 | 22.92 | 20.87 | 19.49 | 17.78 | 16.23 |

76.73 | 35.96 | 33.92 | 24.71 | 23.52 | 22.73 | 20.53 | 18.33 |

85.72 | 38.39 | 34.88 | 25.27 | 25.11 | 25.00 | 24.87 | 20.09 |

95.01 | 42.93 | 37.42 | 26.24 | 27.56 | 28.43 | 29.52 | 21.90 |

Statistical Indicators | NSE | ${\mathit{R}}^{2}$ | RMSE | MAE |
---|---|---|---|---|

Calculation results | 0.734 | 0.731 | 0.344 | 0.290 |

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |

© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Cai, Z.; Wang, J.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, R.
Influence of Vegetation Coverage on Hydraulic Characteristics of Overland Flow. *Water* **2021**, *13*, 1055.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w13081055

**AMA Style**

Cai Z, Wang J, Yang Y, Zhang R.
Influence of Vegetation Coverage on Hydraulic Characteristics of Overland Flow. *Water*. 2021; 13(8):1055.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w13081055

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Cai, Zekang, Jian Wang, Yushuo Yang, and Ran Zhang.
2021. "Influence of Vegetation Coverage on Hydraulic Characteristics of Overland Flow" *Water* 13, no. 8: 1055.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w13081055