Building continuous hydraulic lifting dams in small and medium-sized rivers will affect the hydrodynamics and sediment erosion and deposition process of the river. The variation characteristics of river erosion and deposition resulting from different combined operation schemes of hydraulic lifting dams also differ. To address this issue, four typical flood processes were selected for a 2D numerical simulation of water and sediment dynamics in Fenhe River (Erba-Yitang segment) using Delft3D FM model. Under the four operation schemes of hydraulic lifting dam group, the influence of hydraulic lifting dam group on the variation characteristics of erosion and deposition of river channel was analyzed. The findings provide valuable insights for the scheduling of hydraulic lifting dam groups in the midstream of Fenhe River. Results reveal that, under the schemes 1-4 in four flood scenarios, the water depth in front of dam 14# ranges from approximately 0.5 to 1.4 m, 1.3 to 2.8 m, 0.6 to 1.8 m, and 0.5 to 1.6 m, respectively, at the end of the simulation period. The maximum local velocity behind the dam is approximately 1.5-2.5 m/s, 2.0-6.0 m/s, 2.0-3.0 m/s, and 2.0-2.5 m/s, respectively. The range of erosion and deposition is approximately -0.5 to 1.4 m, -0.3 to 1.9 m, -0.5 to 1.6 m, and -0.5 to 1.5 m, respectively. The total amount of sediment deposition in the river reaches approximately 4.9×104 to 242.3×104 m3, 5.3×104 to 323.5×104 m3, 5.0×104 to 252.5×104 m3, and 4.95×104 to 245.1×104 m3, respectively. The conclusions are as follows: hydraulic lifting dams exhibit the greatest influence on the hydrodynamic field and the change in bed elevation when operating at full capacity. Moreover, the sediment deposition volumes of hydraulic lifting dams are approximately 1.08 to 1.36 times that of non-dam operation under the four flood scenarios.
Key words
erosion and deposition process /
Delft3D FM software /
hydraulic lifting dam /
numerical simulation /
midstream of Fenhe River
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] 钱 宁, 张 仁,周志德. 河床演变学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1987.
[2] 倪晋仁, 刘元元. 论河流生态修复[J]. 水利学报, 2006, 37(9): 1029-1037, 1043.
[3] LAKS I. Mapping of Floodplain Retention and Active Flow Area in 1D Models for Large and Regional-Scale Hydrodynamic Modeling[J]. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 2019, 24(3): 04019001.
[4] BAO L, LI X, SU J. Alteration in the Potential of Sediment Phosphorus Release along Series of Rubber Dams in a Typical Urban Landscape River[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10: 2714.
[5] KUMAR B, KADIA S, AHMAD Z. Sediment Movement over Type a Piano Key Weirs[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 2021, 147(6): 04021018.
[6] CASSERLY C M, TURNER J N, O’SULLIVAN J J, et al. Impact of Low-Head Dams on Bedload Transport Rates in Coarse-Bedded Streams[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 716: 136908.
[7] CHANDESRIS A,VAN LOOY K,DIAMOND J S,et al.Small Dams Alter Thermal Regimes of Downstream Water[J].Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,2019,23(11):4509-4525.
[8] MAGILLIGAN F J, ROBERTS M O, MARTI M, et al. The Impact of Run-of-River Dams on Sediment Longitudinal Connectivity and Downstream Channel Equilibrium[J]. Geomorphology, 2021, 376: 107568.
[9] PEARSON A J, PIZZUTO J. Bedload Transport over Run-of-River Dams, Delaware, U.S.A[J]. Geomorphology, 2015, 248: 382-395.
[10] 张 晨, 于 昊, 于若兰, 等. 不同洪水重现期下橡胶坝调控对洪水风险的影响[J]. 水科学进展, 2021, 32(3): 427-437.
[11] 史鹏飞. 汾河流域干流蓄水工程液压坝汛期安全调度[J]. 中国防汛抗旱, 2018, 28(12): 90-92.
[12] 张 靖, 沈欣菲, 周升龙, 等. 橡胶坝塌坝最大泄流量快速估算方法[J]. raybet体育在线
院报, 2020, 37(4): 62-66.
[13] 孙东坡, 刘明潇, 张晓雷, 等. 冲积性河流河床冲淤调整对洪水泥沙过程的响应: 以黄河游荡型河段为例[J]. 水科学进展, 2014, 25(5): 668-676.
[14] CHURCH M, FERGUSON R I. Morphodynamics: Rivers beyond Steady State[J]. Water Resources Research, 2015, 51(4): 1883-1897.
[15] 周 宇, 钱红露, 曹志先, 等. 冲积河流分级恒定水沙数学模型的适用性研究[J]. 武汉大学学报(工学版), 2018, 51(5): 377-382, 408.
[16] 雷文韬, 夏军强, 谈广鸣. 考虑粘性泥沙运动的黄河口二维水沙输移数学模型[J]. 武汉大学学报(工学版), 2013, 46(4): 430-436, 457.
[17] 李 季, 曹志先, PENDER Gareth, 等. 明渠挟沙水流双层积分模式的双曲性分析[J]. 中国科学: 物理学 力学 天文学, 2015, 45(10): 44-56.
[18] CAO Z X, HU P, PENDER G, et al. Non-capacity Transport of Non-uniform Bed Load Sediment in Alluvial Rivers[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2016, 13(3): 377-396.
[19] 任春平,李海军,梁荣荣.汾河中游液压坝群对洪水演进的影响[J].水电能源科学,2020,38(2):76-79.
[20] NI Y, CAO Z, QI W, et al. Morphodynamic Processes in Rivers with Cascade Movable Weirs - A Case Study of the Middle Fen River[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2021, 603: 127133.
[21] Deltares.D-Flow FM User Manual[K]. The Netherlands: Deltares, 2019.
[22] 梁述杰, 贾小军. 汾河泥沙变化研究[J]. 山西水利科技, 2004(1): 47-49.
[23] HU K, CHEN Q, WANG H, et al. Numerical Modeling of Salt Marsh Morphological Change Induced by Hurricane Sandy[J]. Coastal Engineering, 2018, 132: 63-81.
[24] WILLMOTT C J. On the Validation of Models[J]. Physical Geography, 1981, 2(2): 184-194.
PDF(10057 KB)
