EGU25-12560, updated on 15 Mar 2025
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-12560
EGU General Assembly 2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Poster | Wednesday, 30 Apr, 10:45–12:30 (CEST), Display time Wednesday, 30 Apr, 08:30–12:30
 
Hall X3, X3.95
Coupled effect of river bed and wall roughness on flow resistance 
David Whitfield1,2, Robert Houseago1, Rebecca Hodge2, Stephen Rice3, Robert Ferguson2, Richard Hardy2, Elowyn Yager4, Joel Johnson5, Trevor Hoey6, Christopher Hackney7, and Taís Yamasaki2
David Whitfield et al.
  • 1Geography and Environment, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
  • 2Department of Geography, Durham University, Durham, UK
  • 3Department of Natural Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
  • 4Center for Ecohydraulics Research, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Idaho, Boise, ID, USA
  • 5Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA
  • 6Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
  • 7School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK

Understanding flow resistance in rivers with rough beds and banks is critical in predicting flow velocities and depths for a given discharge; this has important applications in improving estimates of sediment fluxes, flood risk, and the identification of hotspots of geomorphic adjustment in rivers. Previous flume experiments have identified the usefulness of topographically derived bed roughness metrics in evaluating the effect of roughness on flow resistance: (1) standard deviation and (2) skewness of bed elevation distributions, as well as (3) frontal area of in-channel obstacles (σz, γ and λfrespectively). In reality, flow resistance is also provided by channel wall roughness, for example, metre scale fluctuations in bank protrusion, riparian vegetation, or the presence of rough bedrock banks in upland reaches. Here, we extend our physical experiments to include sidewall roughness in addition to bed roughness, to quantify the combined influence of bed and bank roughness on flow hydraulics. 

Our experimental arrangement uses varying combinations of both bed and bank roughness, both at 1:10 scale. We used two different rough-bed configurations, which comprised a 3D mould of a bedrock riverbed (River Greta, UK), with added scaled boulders at 10% and 40% cover. For the banks we added vertical battens running at regular spacing down the length of the flume walls. Seven sidewall configurations were used (as well as a smooth-walled configuration), with battens varying in protrusion and spacing, to achieve configurations with different combinations of sidewall versus bed roughness. Depth-averaged roughness metrics, ⟨σz⟩, ⟨γ⟩ and ⟨λf⟩ describe the combined roughness of the wetted channel. For each configuration, average water depths were measured for five discharges. Water depths were used to evaluate the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor, f, for each experimental run. We present initial results for the rough-wall experiments, evaluating the combined influence of bed and bank roughness on bulk flow resistance, as well as the relative influences of bed versus bank roughness in each configuration.  

How to cite: Whitfield, D., Houseago, R., Hodge, R., Rice, S., Ferguson, R., Hardy, R., Yager, E., Johnson, J., Hoey, T., Hackney, C., and Yamasaki, T.: Coupled effect of river bed and wall roughness on flow resistance , EGU General Assembly 2025, Vienna, Austria, 27 Apr–2 May 2025, EGU25-12560, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu25-12560, 2025.