Discharge Fluctuation Effect on Meandering River Bed Evolution

IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering PAPER OPEN ACCESS Discharge Fluctuation Effect on Meandering River Bed Evolution To cite this article: Kuntjoro et al 217 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 267 1232 View the article online for updates and enhancements. Related content - Model Study of Spontaneous Discharge Fluctuations of a Membrane Potential Sano, Motoaki, Nakauchi et al. - Analysis of low-frequency pulsations in Francis turbines A A Fay - Mathematical modeling of sedimentation process of nanoparticles in gradient medium S I Ezhenkova and S A Chivilikhin This content was downloaded from IP address 148.251.232.83 on 1/1/219 at 2:5

Discharge Fluctuation Effect on Meandering River Bed Evolution Kuntjoro 1 1 Civil Infrastructure Engineering Department, Vocational Faculty of Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember Surabaya E-mail: kuntjoro_rivers@yahoo.co.id Ismail Saud 2, Didik Harijanto 2 2 Civil Infrastructure Engineering Department, Vocational Faculty of Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember Surabaya Abstract. This research was based on some considerations: first discharge fluctuation argued that none rivers with constant discharge and second meandering river bed evolution with considering that none of rivers in a steady state without bed change. This research developed to get formulation the relationship between fluctuations discharge with the evolution of the bottom of river considering discharge, parameter rivers and parameter sediment. In the span of daily discharge data 1997-211 and cross section monitoring annual results 1997-211 evolution of bottom of a river subjects obtained: Formula 1 is the relationship between discharge fluctuations with rate of sedimentation (S) and Formula 2 is the relationship between discharge fluctuations with rate of erosion (E). Thus formula have higher prediction accuracy than other published formulas and it is applicable to predict Brantas River bed evolution approximate with the real conditions. Further analysis from the output KUN-QArSHOV formula produces: Erosion equation S = 25,167e,34 Q, on constant discharge, sedimentation value occur is 25.167.1-5 meter. Sedimentation equation E = 8,3455e,75 Q, on constant discharge, erosion value occure is 8.3455.1-5 meter. Critical point between sedimentation and erosion happened on discharge between 269 m 3 /second and 27 m 3 /second No constant discharge in the real river conditions. In the notes of discharge rivers resulting from automatic water level a recorder (AWLR), river discharge is always changing. It means there are always fluctuations in discharge in all the time. Erosion and sedimentation in the river depend on the discharge in the river. Thus discharge fluctuations will have an influence to the formation and change the bottom of a river. In general, arch is undesirable in open channels, because they friction would increase loss and lead to danger due to levee of the river by erosion and sliding caused helical flow [1],[2]. In erodible channels, the action of helical flow will develop a configuration in the bed [4]. In an alluvial bend it seems that the configuration of the channel cross section is defined more or less in accordance with certain natural laws [18], [19]. The form of bottom in arch river cross section deeper approaching cliff beyond according to Ripley and V.T. Chow [4]. The river bottom evolution in this research was 1 To whom any correspondence should be addressed. Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3. licence. Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI. Published under licence by Ltd 1

erosion and sedimentation quantities analysed based on the discharge quantity Q that happen all the time. Thus obtained change of bottom vertical ( V) and horizontal ( H) in any change of discharge ( Q). The form of bottom in arch river cross section were deeper approached by cliff beyond according to Ripley and V.T. Chow expressed in Figure 1[4] 2 x xk y = 6,35D,437,433 1 + 2 T r o (1) Where: y = river depth (feet) x = abscise (feet) D = hydraulic depth (feet) r o = outer arc radius (feet) K = 17,52 (Chow, 1959) r o T/2 O T/2 x Arch centre 1,44 y Figure 1. The form of river cross section in arch condition. 3.1. Meandering River Evolution Meander evolution depends on initial geometric condition and upstream meanders that was reviewed. Thus can be estimated the movement of meanders evolution direction [4], some possible direction of meander evolution as shown in Figure 2. [6],[7],[9] Type A describe evolution meanders with low amplitude with the rate of evolution of sluggish. Type B is meander evolution that occurs along flood plains in the narrow flow of river. Type C is meander evolution that occurs in unstable levee of the river. Type D is occurs on highly meandering stream, when the meandering bend becomes too large, secondary meanders were created along the existing loop. Type E is quite similar to Mode D, but cut off is expected in this type. Type F and G were occured along locally braided sinuous or meandering stream. [8],[1] 2

A B C D E F G Figure 2. Type of Meander Loop Evolution [3] 3.2. Predicting Scouring and Sedimentation in Meandering River River meandering geometry changes is a natural process [12], for long time will change the river geometry [13]. Erosion and Sedimentation in Meandering River position are illustrated in Figure 3. then predicted by KUN-QArSHOV equation [14], [15], [16]. Erosion in toe of bank of the river cause sliding and other process in the river [17], these can be harmful to the river bank and hydraulic structure near closely with the river. θ = = φ Sedimentation < θ < φ Erosion Water Level Balance Condition -15-1 -5 5 1 15 River Width Figure 3. Meandering River bed evolution [12]. 4.1. Meandering and Geometry of Brantas River Plan form of Brantas River looked from Google Earth shown in Figure 4. And cross section in two points of observation show in Figure 5 and Figure 6. 3

Research station 1 Research station 2 Research station 1 Research station 2 Figure 4. Two points of observation in Meandering of Brantas River.[12],[16] 2 18 16 14 Depth (m) 12 1 8 6 Initial River Bed on 1992 4 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 Width (m) Figure 5. Cross Section of the river in Research Point 1. 4

2 18 16 14 Depth (m) 12 1 8 6 4 Initial River Bed on 1992 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21 22 Width ( m ) Figure 6. Cross Section of the river in Research Point 2. 4.2. River Meander parameter River meander parameter on research point 1 and point 2 were explained in Table 1. Table 1. River meander parameter Research River Meander Parameter Station r c (m) λ (m) a (m) θ ( ο ) φ W (m) 1 49 19 395 41 12 292 2 1462 189 261 8 61 179 4.3. Discharge Fluctuation of Brantas River Discharge fluctuation in Brantas River from automatic water level recoded nearby research station 1 is arranged in Figure 7 to Figure 1 Discharge (m 3 /secon) 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 1-Jan-92 31-Des-92 31-Des-93 31-Des-94 1-Jan-96 31-Des-96 Figure 7. Discharge fluctuation 1992-1996. 5

Discharge (m 3 /secon) 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 31-Des-96 31-Des-97 31-Des-98 1-Jan- 31-Des- 31-Des-1 Figure 8. Discharge fluctuation 1997-21. Discharge (m 3 /secon) 18 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 31-Des-1 31-Des-2 1-Jan-4 31-Des-4 31-Des-5 31-Des-6 Figure 9. Discharge fluctuation 22-26. 6

Discharge (m 3 /secon) 2 18 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 31-Des-6 1-Jan-8 31-Des-8 31-Des-9 31-Des-1 1-Jan-12 Figure 1. Discharge fluctuation 2-21. 5. Result of river bed evolution from KUN-QArSHOV simulation methods Result of river bed evolution expressed in the relationship curve between δq with H and V from KUN-QARSHOV simulation methods with data input discharged in 1992-1996, 1997-21, 22-26 and 27-21.[12], 5.1. The results of river bed evolution by KUN-QArSHOV simulation in research station 1 Output from KUN-QArSHOV simulation is the relationship chart between δq with H and V. The relationship chart between Q with H and V for research station 1 can be examined in Figure 11 to Figure 15. 7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 dq δq (m3/dt) 3 /second) dv(1^-5 δv (m -5 m) meter) dh(1^-5 δh (m -5 m) meter) -7 1-Jan-92 31-Des-92 31-Des-93 31-Des-94 1-Jan-96 31-Des-96 Figure 11. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 1 along 1992 to 1996. 7

9 7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 -7 dq Q (m3/dt) 3 /second) dv(1^-5 v(m -5 m) meter) dh(1^-5 h (m -5 m) meter) -9 31-Des-96 31-Des-97 31-Des-98 1-Jan- 31-Des- 31-Des-1 Figure 12. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 1 along 1997-21. 2 18 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2-2 -4-6 -8-1 -12-14 -16-18 dq Q (m3/dt) /second) dv(1^-5 v(m meter) m) dh(1^-5 h (m -5 m) meter) -2 31-Des-99 3-Des- 3-Des-1 3-Des-2 31-Des-3 3-Des-4 3-Des-5 3-Des-6 Figure 13. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 1 along 22-25. 8

7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 dq Q (m3/dt) 3 /second) dv(1^-5 v(m meter) m) dh(1^-5 h (m -5 m) meter) -7 3-Des-4 3-Des-5 3-Des-6 31-Des-7 3-Des-8 Figure 14. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 1 along 26-27. 7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 dq Q (m3/dt) 3 /second) dv(1^-5 v(m m) meter) dh(1^-5 h (m -5 m) meter) -7 3-Des-6 31-Des-7 3-Des-8 3-Des-9 3-Des-1 31-Des-11 Figure 15. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 1 along 28 to 21. 5.2. The results of river bed evolution by KUN-QARSHOV simulation in research station 2 The relationship curve between Q with H and V for research station 2 can be examined in Figure 16 to 19. 9

7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 Q (m 3 /second) v(m -5 meter) h (m -5 meter) -7 1-Jan-92 31-Des-92 31-Des-93 31-Des-94 1-Jan-96 31-Des-96 Figure 16. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 2 along 1992 to 1996. 9 7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 -7 dq Q (m3/dt) /second) dv(1^-5 v(m -5 m) meter) dh(1^-5 m) h (m -5 meter) -9 31-Des-96 31-Des-97 31-Des-98 1-Jan- 31-Des- 31-Des-1 Figure 17. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 2 along 1997-21. 1

8 6 4 2-2 -4-6 dq Q (m3/dt) 3 /second) dv(1^-5 v(m -5 m) meter) dh(1^-5 h (m -5 m) meter) -8 3-Des- 3-Des-1 3-Des-2 31-Des-3 3-Des-4 3-Des-5 3-Des-6 31-Des-7 Figure 18. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 2 along 22-27. 7 5 3 1-1 -3-5 dq (m3/dt) dv(1^-5 m) dh(1^-5 m) -7 3-Des-6 31-Des-7 3-Des-8 3-Des-9 3-Des-1 31-Des-11 Figure 19. Discharge Fluctuation Effect on the Meandering River Bed Evolution in Research station 2 along 28 to 211. 11

6. Discharge fluctuation and meandering river evolution relationship 6.1 River bed sedimentation in river evolution Evolution of the meandering river from sedimentation was analyzed on output of method KUN-QArSHOV modeling to get a relation between fluctuations discharge value Q with the value of the sediment S. The analysis results are shown in Figure 2. Relationship between Q with S was satisfied to the erosion equation S = 26.154e,33, Q where S is sedimetation value and Q discharge value. In constant discharge or Q = occured sedimentation value was 26.154.1-5 meter. 225 2 dev(1^-5 m) deh(1^-5 m) S V (1 5 m) S H (1 5 m) S = 26,154e,33 Q 175 Sedimentation S (1-5 m) 15 125 1 75 5 25 25 5 75 1 125 15 175 2 225 25 275 3 325 35 375 4 425 45 475 5 525 55 575 6 625 65 Discharge Fluctuation Q (m 3 /secon) Figure 2. River bed sedimentation in river evolution Q with S. 6.2 River bed erosion in river evolution Evolution of the meandering river from erosion is analyzed on output of method KUN-QArSHOV modeling to get a relation between fluctuations discharge value Q with the value of the erosion E. The analysis results are shown in Figure 21. Relationship between Q with E was satisfied to the sedimentation equation E = 8,3455e where E is erosion value and Q discharge fluctuation value. On constant discharge, occured erosion value was 8.3455.1-5 meter,75 Q 12

3 275 dgh(1^-5 E m) dgv(1^-5 E m) V (1 5 H (1 5 m) m) 25 225 E = 8,3455e,75δQ Erosion E (1-5 m) 2 175 15 125 1 75 5 25 25 5 75 1 125 15 175 2 225 25 275 3 325 35 375 4 425 45 Discharge Fluktuation Q (m 3 /secon) Figure 21. River bed erosion in river evolution Q with E. 6.3 Simultaneous Erosion and Sedimentation in River Meandering Evolution Evolution of the bottom of meandering river is the difference between sedimentation value and erosion value in the same discharge and the right time. Charts of the relationship between Q with E, and Q with S simultaneously was shown in Figure 22. This chart is observable the condition of a critical point between sedimentation and erosion happened on discharge between 269 m 3 /second and 27 m 3 /second, shown in Table 2 Table 2. Critical point between sedimentation and erosion Q Sedimentation Erosion (m 3 /second) (1-5 m) (1-5 m) 267 62.39 61.82 268 62.6 62.29 269 62.81 62.75 27 63.3 63.23 271 63.24 63.7 272 63.46 64.18 273 63.67 64.67 13

55 5 SEDIMENTATION EROSION (! -5 m) 45 4 35 3 25 2 15 1 5 SEDIMENTATION EROSION CRITICAL POINT OF EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION 5 1 15 2 25 3 35 4 45 5 55 DISCHARGE FLUCTUATION (m 3 /secon) Figure 22. Charts of the relationship between Q with E, and Q with S simultaneously 6.4 Result of river bed evolution in research station 1 Result of river bed evolution in research station 1 is expressed in Figure 23 19 17 15 River Bed 1992 River Bed 1997 River Bed 21 River Bed 26 River Bed 28 River Bed 211 Max Water Level Min Water Level 13 Depth (m) 11 9 7 5 3 1-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21 22 Width ( m ) Figure 23. River bed evolution along 1992 to 211 in research station 1. 6.5 Result of river bed evolution in research station 2 Result of river bed evolution in research station 2 is expressed in Figure 24 14

2 18 16 14 Depth (m) 12 1 8 6 4 2 River Bed 1992 River Bed 1997 River Bed 21 River Bed 26 River Bed 28 River Bed 211 Max Water Level Min Water Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 Width (m) Figure 24. River bed evolution along 1992 to 211 in research station 2. 7. Conclusions Erosion and sedimentation in the river happened simultaneously in one discharge value. Evolution of the bottom of the river is simultaneous between sedimentation and erosion, expressed in the relationship chart between Q with S, and Q with E, these chart are formulated to the equations as follows: Erosion equation S = 25,167e,34 Q On constant discharge, sedimentation value was 25.167.1-5 meter Sedimentation equation E = 8,3455e,75 Q On constant discharge, erosion value was 8.3455.1-5 meter Critical point between sedimentation and erosion happened on discharge between 269 m 3 /second and 27 m 3 /second 8. Advice It needed annual cross section measurement in similar points for synchronizing data from Perum Jasa Tirta I measurements to measurement data that will be input in next research. 9. Acknowledgement to officials and staff Perum Jasa Tirta I in Malang and the Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Brantas in Surabaya over facilities, generosity, services and contributions data which is particularly beneficial for composing this research. 1. References [1] Abed, J., and Garcia, M. H. 26 RVR Meander: A Toolbox for Re-meandering of Channelized Streams. Computers & Geosciences, 32, 92-11. [2] A. J. Odgaard, 1987 Streambank Erosion along Two Rivers in Iowa, in Water Resources Research, 23(7), pp. 1225-1236. [3] Brice, J.C. (1977). Lateral Migration of the Middle Sacramento River, California. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations, 77-43. [4] Chow, V. T.1959, Open Channel Hdraulics, McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, LTD 15

[5] D. M. Keady and M. S. Priest, 1977 The Downstream Migration Rate of River Meandering Patterns, In Proceedings, Mississippi Water Resources Conference, Meeting 12th Mississippi Water Resources Conference, Jackson, MS, pp. 29-34. [6] Duan, J. G. 21 Simulation of Streambank Erosion Processes with a Two-Dimensional Numerical Model. In Landscape Erosion and Evolution Modelling, Harmon RS, Doe WW III (eds). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers: New York; 389 427. [7] Duan, J. G. and Pierre Y. Julien, 25. Numerical Simulation of the Inception of Channel Meandering, Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 3, 193 111 (25), Published online in Wiley Inter Science (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 1.12/esp.1264 [8] D. S. Biedenharn, P. G.Combs, G. J.Hill, Jr.Pinkard, C. F., and C. B. Pinkston, 1989 Relationship between Channel Migration and Radius of Curvature on the Red River, in Proc., Int. Symp. on Sediment Transport Modeling, New Orleans, LO, pp.536-541. [9] J. L. Briaud, F. Ting, H. C. Chen, Y. Cao, S. W. Han, and K. W. Kwak, 21 Erosion Function Apparatus for Scour Rate Predictions, IEEE Trans.Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(2), pp. 15-113. [1] J. M.Hooke, 198 Magnitude and Distribution of Rates of River Bank Erosion, in Earth Surface Processes, 5(2), pp. 143-157. [11] P. Ph. Jansen, L. van Bendegom, J van de Berg, M de Vries, and A. Zanen, 1979 Principles of Rover Engineering, in Pitman Publishing Limited ISBN -273-1139-1, First Published. [12] Kuntjoro, M. Bisri, A. Masrevaniah, A. Suharyanto, 212.a,, Empirical Model Of River Meandering Geometry Changes Due To Discharge Fluntuation Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, TextRoad Publication, J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 2(2)127-133, 212 [13] Kuntjoro, M. Bisri, A. Masrevaniah, A. Suharyanto, 212.b., Modeling of discharge fluctuation influence on river meandering geometry change. International Journal of Academic Research Part A; 212; 4(6), 189-196. DOI: 1.7813/275-4124.212/4-6/A.26. Vol. 4. No. 6. November, 212 [14] Kuntjoro, M. Bisri, A. Masrevaniah, A. Suharyanto, 212.c., Empirical Model of Meandering River Geometry Change Under Discharge Fluctuation, Doctor Dissertation, Civil Engineering Deartment Brawijaya University, Indonesia. [15] Kuntjoro, M. Bisri, A. Masrevaniah, A. Suharyanto, 213.a, River Bed Erosion and Sedimentation Behavior in Discharge Fluctuation Condition, Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 18 (12): 1851-1858, 213 ISSN 199-9233 [16] Kuntjoro, Choirul Anwar, Pudiastuti, Didik Harijanto, Sungkono, 213.b, Inisiasi Perkiraan Arah Pergerakan Alur Sungai, Jurnal APLIKASI ISSN.197-753X, Volume 11, Nomor 2, Agustus 213 [17] Kuntjoro, M. Bisri, A. Suharyanto, A. Masrevaniah, 214, Impacts of River Groove Propagation on Irrigation Infrastructural Failures, IPTEK, Journal of Proceeding Series, Vol. 1, 214 (eissn: 2354-626) [18] P. F. Hudson and R. H. Kesel,, 2 Channel Migration and Meander-bend Curvature in the Lower Mississippi River Prior to Major Human Modification, in Geology, 28(6), pp. 531-534. [19] S. Ikeda, G. Parker, and K. Sawi, 1981 Bend Theory of River Meanders. I: Linear Development, IEEE Trans Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 112, pp. 363-377. 16