A review of open channel turbulence, focusing especially on certain features stemming from the presence of the free surface and the bed of a river. Part one presents the statistical theory of turbulence; Part two addresses the coherent structures in open-channel flows and boundary layers.

Turbulence in Open-Channel Flows

The 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP14) present the time‐independent component of the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3), which provides authoritative estimates of the magnitude, location, and time‐averaged frequency of potentially damaging earthquakes in California. The primary achievements have been to relax fault segmentation and include multifault ruptures, both limitations of UCERF2. The rates of all earthquakes are solved for simultaneously and from a broader range of data, using a system‐level inversion that is both conceptually simple and extensible. The inverse problem is large and underdetermined, so a range of models is sampled using an efficient simulated annealing algorithm. The approach is more derivative than prescriptive (e.g., magnitude–frequency distributions are no longer assumed), so new analysis tools were developed for exploring solutions. Epistemic uncertainties were also accounted for using 1440 alternative logic‐tree branches, necessitating access to supercomputers. The most influential uncertainties include alternative deformation models (fault slip rates), a new smoothed seismicity algorithm, alternative values for the total rate of M w≥5 events, and different scaling relationships, virtually all of which are new. As a notable first, three deformation models are based on kinematically consistent inversions of geodetic and geologic data, also providing slip‐rate constraints on faults previously excluded due to lack of geologic data. The grand inversion constitutes a system‐level framework for testing hypotheses and balancing the influence of different experts. For example, we demonstrate serious challenges with the Gutenberg–Richter hypothesis for individual faults. UCERF3 is still an approximation of the system, however, and the range of models is limited (e.g., constrained to stay close to UCERF2). Nevertheless, UCERF3 removes the apparent UCERF2 overprediction of M  6.5–7 earthquake rates and also includes types of multifault ruptures seen in nature. Although UCERF3 fits the data better than UCERF2 overall, there may be areas that warrant further site‐specific investigation. Supporting products may be of general interest, and we list key assumptions and avenues for future model improvements.

/pdf/uniform-california-earthquake-rupture-forecast-version-3-51twitiqqw.pdf

Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3)—The Time‐Independent Model

In the absence of actual suspended sediment concentration (SSC) measurements, hydrologists have used sediment rating (sediment transport) curves to estimate (predict) SSCs for subsequent flux calculations. Various evaluations of the sediment rating-curve method were made using data from long-term, daily sediment-measuring sites within large (>1 000 000 km 2 ), medium ( 1000 km 2 ), and small (<1000 km 2 ) river basins in the USA and Europe relative to the estimation of suspended sediment fluxes. The evaluations address such issues as the accuracy of flux estimations for various levels of temporal resolution as well as the impact of sampling frequency on the magnitude of flux estimation errors. The sediment rating-curve method tends to underpredict high, and overpredict low SSCs. As such, the range of errors associated with concomitant flux estimates for relatively short time-frames (e.g. daily, weekly) are likely to be substantially larger than those associated with longer time-frames (e.g. quarterly, annually) because the over- and underpredictions do not have sufficient time to balance each other. Hence, when error limits must be kept under s20%, temporal resolution probably should be limited to quarterly or greater. The evaluations indicate that over periods of 20 or more years, errors of <1% can be achieved using a single sediment rating curve based on data spanning the entire period. However, somewhat better estimates for the entire period, and markedly better annual estimates within the period, can be obtained if individual annual sediment rating curves are used instead. Relatively accurate (errors <s20%) annual suspended sediment fluxes can be obtained from hydrologically based monthly measurements/samples. For 5-year periods or longer, similar results can be obtained from measurements/samples collected once every 2 months. In either case, hydrologically based sampling, as opposed to calendar-based sampling is likely to limit the magnitude of flux estimation errors. Published in 2003 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

An evaluation of sediment rating curves for estimating suspended sediment concentrations for subsequent flux calculations

Before 1900, the Missouri–Mississippi River system transported an estimated 400 million metric tons per year of sediment from the interior of the United States to coastal Louisiana. During the last two decades (1987–2006), this transport has averaged 145 million metric tons per year. The cause for this substantial decrease in sediment has been attributed to the trapping characteristics of dams constructed on the muddy part of the Missouri River during the 1950s. However, reexamination of more than 60 years of water- and sediment-discharge data indicates that the dams alone are not the sole cause. These dams trap about 100–150 million metric tons per year, which represent about half the decrease in sediment discharge near the mouth of the Mississippi. Changes in relations between water discharge and suspended-sediment concentration suggest that the Missouri–Mississippi has been transformed from a transport-limited to a supply-limited system. Thus, other engineering activities such as meander cutoffs, river-training structures, and bank revetments as well as soil erosion controls have trapped sediment, eliminated sediment sources, or protected sediment that was once available for transport episodically throughout the year. Removing major engineering structures such as dams probably would not restore sediment discharges to pre-1900 state, mainly because of the numerous smaller engineering structures and other soil-retention works throughout the Missouri–Mississippi system. Published in 2009 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

https://www.engr.colostate.edu/~pierre/ce_old/classes/ce717/Bob%20Meade%20Papers/CausesfortheDeclineHP2010.pdf

Causes for the decline of suspended‐sediment discharge in the Mississippi River system, 1940–2007

Understanding spatial distributions, synergies, and tradeoffs of multiple ecosystem services (benefits people derive from ecosystems) remains challenging. We analyzed the supply of 10 ecosystem services for 2006 across a large urbanizing agricultural watershed in the Upper Midwest of the United States, and asked the following: (i) Where are areas of high and low supply of individual ecosystem services, and are these areas spatially concordant across services? (ii) Where on the landscape are the strongest tradeoffs and synergies among ecosystem services located? (iii) For ecosystem service pairs that experience tradeoffs, what distinguishes locations that are “win–win” exceptions from other locations? Spatial patterns of high supply for multiple ecosystem services often were not coincident; locations where six or more services were produced at high levels (upper 20th percentile) occupied only 3.3% of the landscape. Most relationships among ecosystem services were synergies, but tradeoffs occurred between crop production and water quality. Ecosystem services related to water quality and quantity separated into three different groups, indicating that management to sustain freshwater services along with other ecosystem services will not be simple. Despite overall tradeoffs between crop production and water quality, some locations were positive for both, suggesting that tradeoffs are not inevitable everywhere and might be ameliorated in some locations. Overall, we found that different areas of the landscape supplied different suites of ecosystem services, and their lack of spatial concordance suggests the importance of managing over large areas to sustain multiple ecosystem services.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/110/29/12149.full.pdf

Spatial interactions among ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural watershed

..........................................................................................................................................................

/pdf/identifying-and-preserving-high-water-mark-data-wbr0vjeqpx.pdf

Identifying and preserving high-water mark data

Regional change in the variability and magnitude of flooding could be a major consequence of future global climate change. Extreme floods have the capacity to rapidly transform landscapes and expose landscape vulnerabilities through highly variable spatial patterns of inundation, erosion, and deposition. We use the historic activation of the Birds Point-New Madrid Floodway during the Mississippi and Ohio River Flooding of 2011 as a scientifically unique stress experiment to analyze indicators of floodplain vulnerability. We use pre- and postflood airborne Light Detection and Ranging data sets to locate erosional and depositional hotspots over the 540 km2 agricultural Floodway. While riparian vegetation between the river and the main levee breach likely prevented widespread deposition, localized scour and deposition occurred near the levee breaches. Eroded gullies nearly 1 km in length were observed at a low ridge of a relict meander scar of the Mississippi River. Our flow modeling and spatial mapping anal...

Assessment of floodplain vulnerability during extreme Mississippi River flood 2011.

During 2008, record precipitation amounts, coupled with already saturated soils, resulted in flooding along many rivers in the United States Midwest Separate flooding events occurred in January, February, March, April, May, June, July, and September of 2008 The June floods were by far the most severe and widespread with substantial (and in places record) flooding and damage occurring in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wisconsin Indiana had the most recurrent flooding during 2008, with peak-of-record streamflows occurring during January, February, March, June, and September During 2008, peak-of-record streamflows were recorded at more than 147 US Geological Survey (USGS) streamgages The annual exceedance probability of the peak streamflows at 26 streamgages was less than 02 percent and between 02 and 1 percent at 67 streamgages Trends in flood magnitudes were computed for USGS Midwest streamgages that had no regulation No Midwest-wide systematic trends upward or downward were evident, although clusters of consistent trends (both upward and downward) were detected in parts of the Midwest

/pdf/flooding-in-the-united-states-midwest-2008-ovk5anyq08.pdf

Flooding in the United States Midwest, 2008

/pdf/introduction-to-field-methods-for-hydrologic-and-4ax009os3u.pdf

Introduction to field methods for hydrologic and environmental studies

Sediment Transport in the Lower Missouri and the Central Mississippi Rivers, June 26 Through September 14, 1993

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Robert R. Holmes

Author Tools

Chat about Author