2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10236-010-0314-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bed composition generation for morphodynamic modeling: case study of San Pablo Bay in California, USA

Abstract: Applications of process-based morphodynamic models are often constrained by limited availability of data on bed composition, which may have a considerable impact on the modeled morphodynamic development. One may even distinguish a period of "morphodynamic spin-up" in which the model generates the bed level according to some ill-defined initial bed composition rather than describing the realistic behavior of the system. The present paper proposes a methodology to generate bed composition of multiple sand and/or… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many have a form similar to the Ariathurai and Arulanandan (1978) equation used in ROMS (Warner et al, 2008), which relates erosional flux E (kg m −2 s −1 ) to the normalized excess shear stress as E = E 0 (1 − φ) [(τ sf − τ c ) /τ sf ] when τ sf > τ c , where E 0 (kg m −2 s −1 ) is an empirical rate constant, φ (m 3 m −3 ) is sediment porosity, τ sf (Pa) is the skin-friction component of the bottom shear stress, and τ c (Pa) is the critical shear stress for erosion. The erosion of cohesive sediment in some models (for example Delft3D; van der Wegen et al, 2011;Caldwell and Edmonds, 2014) uses a similar formulation subject to a user-specified critical shear stress for erosion. It is recognized that τ c may increase with depth in sediment, and erosion rate formulae have been proposed that incorporate depth-dependent profiles for E 0 and/or τ c (Whitehouse et al, 2000;Mehta, 2014).…”
Section: Previous Modeling Effortsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Many have a form similar to the Ariathurai and Arulanandan (1978) equation used in ROMS (Warner et al, 2008), which relates erosional flux E (kg m −2 s −1 ) to the normalized excess shear stress as E = E 0 (1 − φ) [(τ sf − τ c ) /τ sf ] when τ sf > τ c , where E 0 (kg m −2 s −1 ) is an empirical rate constant, φ (m 3 m −3 ) is sediment porosity, τ sf (Pa) is the skin-friction component of the bottom shear stress, and τ c (Pa) is the critical shear stress for erosion. The erosion of cohesive sediment in some models (for example Delft3D; van der Wegen et al, 2011;Caldwell and Edmonds, 2014) uses a similar formulation subject to a user-specified critical shear stress for erosion. It is recognized that τ c may increase with depth in sediment, and erosion rate formulae have been proposed that incorporate depth-dependent profiles for E 0 and/or τ c (Whitehouse et al, 2000;Mehta, 2014).…”
Section: Previous Modeling Effortsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Biodiffusion may alter stratigraphy, and there are many 1DV models that treat the diffusive mass flux of sediment and reactive constituents in the bed, mostly motivated by water quality and geochemical concerns (e.g., Boudreau, 1997;DiToro, 2001;Winterwerp and van Kesteren, 2004). Several regional-scale circulation and sediment transport models treat sediment stratigraphy, including ECOMSED (HydroQual, Inc., 2004), ROMS/CSTMS (Warner et al, 2008), Delft3D (van der Wegen et al, 2011), FVCOM, TELEMAC/SISYPHE (Villaret et al, 2011;Tassi and Villaret, 2014), and MARS3D (Le Mengual et al, 2017) and some have unpublished treatments for cohesive processes. Sanford (2008) pioneered an approach in which the critical shear stress for each bed layer was nudged toward an assumed equilibrium value, and the critical stress for erosion of the surface layer alternately became smaller or larger in response to deposition and erosion.…”
Section: Previous Modeling Effortsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Calibration parameters are fundamental together with boundary conditions and an appropriate combination of hydrodynamic forces [26,27]; usually a great effort is spent on researching a reliable reconstruction of the initial bed composition [8,28], but the same is not carried out for the variability of threshold bed shear stress for erosion, often assumed constant both in space and time [6,29], contrary to experimental evidence [30][31][32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, sediment distributions coarsened (strong fraction dominant) with time. This method is similar to that employed by Van der Wegen et al (2010) who found that allowing for a spin-up of bed composition led to more representative geomorphic evolution.…”
Section: Sediment Transport and Bed Parametersmentioning
confidence: 76%