Hongliang Kang , Wenlong Wang , Mingming Guo , Yibao Lou
{"title":"壁上流对黄土沟头的分配和侵蚀作用","authors":"Hongliang Kang , Wenlong Wang , Mingming Guo , Yibao Lou","doi":"10.1016/j.catena.2024.108422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>On-wall flow and jet flow converted from upstream flow at the gully brink play important but differential roles in gully head erosion. However, on-wall flow allocation at gully brinks and its erosive effects on vegetation-covered loess gully heads remain unclear. Simulated flow scouring experiments were conducted on grass-covered gully heads under different inflow rates (3.0–7.2 m<sup>3</sup>/h) and upstream slope gradients (1–7°) to investigate the on-wall flow proportion and relationships with the hydraulic parameters of upstream flow, as well as erosion and sediment yield characteristics. The results showed that the on-wall flow rates linearly increased with increasing inflow rate (<em>P</em> < 0.01) but decreased as the slope gradient increased, whereas the jet flow rate increased as the inflow rate or slope gradient increased. The on-wall flow proportions ranged from 24.6 % to 58.7 % and decreased with increasing inflow rate or slope gradient, whereas the jet flow proportions exhibited the reverse trend. The on-wall and jet flow proportions had the most significant correlations with the Froude number, following a negative power function and positive logarithmic function (<em>P</em> < 0.01), respectively. The breadth and depth of the scour hole that developed on the gully headwall increased linearly with the on-wall flow rate (<em>P</em> < 0.01). Jet flow had a limited effect of accumulation on scour hole development, with average increases of 13.5 % and 8.6 % in the breadth and depth, respectively. On-wall flow generally contributed 17.6 %–48.4 % of the sediment driven by on-wall and jet flows but played a dominant role under 1° upstream slope gradient and 3.6 m<sup>3</sup>/h inflow rate in which the contribution reached 64.9 %. On-wall flow might have dominated the runoff volume and played a dominant role in the sediment yield under low upstream slope gradients and inflow rates and was essentially responsible for scour hole development, which could destabilize and retreat the gully head.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":9801,"journal":{"name":"Catena","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The allocation and erosive effects of on-wall flow on loess gully heads\",\"authors\":\"Hongliang Kang , Wenlong Wang , Mingming Guo , Yibao Lou\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.catena.2024.108422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>On-wall flow and jet flow converted from upstream flow at the gully brink play important but differential roles in gully head erosion. However, on-wall flow allocation at gully brinks and its erosive effects on vegetation-covered loess gully heads remain unclear. Simulated flow scouring experiments were conducted on grass-covered gully heads under different inflow rates (3.0–7.2 m<sup>3</sup>/h) and upstream slope gradients (1–7°) to investigate the on-wall flow proportion and relationships with the hydraulic parameters of upstream flow, as well as erosion and sediment yield characteristics. The results showed that the on-wall flow rates linearly increased with increasing inflow rate (<em>P</em> < 0.01) but decreased as the slope gradient increased, whereas the jet flow rate increased as the inflow rate or slope gradient increased. The on-wall flow proportions ranged from 24.6 % to 58.7 % and decreased with increasing inflow rate or slope gradient, whereas the jet flow proportions exhibited the reverse trend. The on-wall and jet flow proportions had the most significant correlations with the Froude number, following a negative power function and positive logarithmic function (<em>P</em> < 0.01), respectively. The breadth and depth of the scour hole that developed on the gully headwall increased linearly with the on-wall flow rate (<em>P</em> < 0.01). Jet flow had a limited effect of accumulation on scour hole development, with average increases of 13.5 % and 8.6 % in the breadth and depth, respectively. On-wall flow generally contributed 17.6 %–48.4 % of the sediment driven by on-wall and jet flows but played a dominant role under 1° upstream slope gradient and 3.6 m<sup>3</sup>/h inflow rate in which the contribution reached 64.9 %. On-wall flow might have dominated the runoff volume and played a dominant role in the sediment yield under low upstream slope gradients and inflow rates and was essentially responsible for scour hole development, which could destabilize and retreat the gully head.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Catena\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Catena\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0341816224006192\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catena","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0341816224006192","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The allocation and erosive effects of on-wall flow on loess gully heads
On-wall flow and jet flow converted from upstream flow at the gully brink play important but differential roles in gully head erosion. However, on-wall flow allocation at gully brinks and its erosive effects on vegetation-covered loess gully heads remain unclear. Simulated flow scouring experiments were conducted on grass-covered gully heads under different inflow rates (3.0–7.2 m3/h) and upstream slope gradients (1–7°) to investigate the on-wall flow proportion and relationships with the hydraulic parameters of upstream flow, as well as erosion and sediment yield characteristics. The results showed that the on-wall flow rates linearly increased with increasing inflow rate (P < 0.01) but decreased as the slope gradient increased, whereas the jet flow rate increased as the inflow rate or slope gradient increased. The on-wall flow proportions ranged from 24.6 % to 58.7 % and decreased with increasing inflow rate or slope gradient, whereas the jet flow proportions exhibited the reverse trend. The on-wall and jet flow proportions had the most significant correlations with the Froude number, following a negative power function and positive logarithmic function (P < 0.01), respectively. The breadth and depth of the scour hole that developed on the gully headwall increased linearly with the on-wall flow rate (P < 0.01). Jet flow had a limited effect of accumulation on scour hole development, with average increases of 13.5 % and 8.6 % in the breadth and depth, respectively. On-wall flow generally contributed 17.6 %–48.4 % of the sediment driven by on-wall and jet flows but played a dominant role under 1° upstream slope gradient and 3.6 m3/h inflow rate in which the contribution reached 64.9 %. On-wall flow might have dominated the runoff volume and played a dominant role in the sediment yield under low upstream slope gradients and inflow rates and was essentially responsible for scour hole development, which could destabilize and retreat the gully head.
期刊介绍:
Catena publishes papers describing original field and laboratory investigations and reviews on geoecology and landscape evolution with emphasis on interdisciplinary aspects of soil science, hydrology and geomorphology. It aims to disseminate new knowledge and foster better understanding of the physical environment, of evolutionary sequences that have resulted in past and current landscapes, and of the natural processes that are likely to determine the fate of our terrestrial environment.
Papers within any one of the above topics are welcome provided they are of sufficiently wide interest and relevance.