Testing the Leopold-Maddock and the Dingman hydraulic geometry hypotheses with detailed measurements in a small river

How well do traditional and analytical hydraulic geometry hypotheses predict discharge? We tested whether Dingman's analytical expressions can be validated with field data by comparing it with the traditional Leopold-Maddock at-a-station hydraulic geometry (AHG). Data from a small basin (66 km...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Hydrological sciences journal 2021-06, Vol.66 (8), p.1372-1382
Main Authors: Grison, Fernando, Mota, Aline de Almeida, Kobiyama, Masato
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bugres River
Coefficients
Correlation
Dingman method
Discharge
Discharge estimation
Exponents
Geometry
Hydraulic geometry
Hydraulics
Hypotheses
Leopold-Maddock method
Mathematical analysis
Width
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:How well do traditional and analytical hydraulic geometry hypotheses predict discharge? We tested whether Dingman's analytical expressions can be validated with field data by comparing it with the traditional Leopold-Maddock at-a-station hydraulic geometry (AHG). Data from a small basin (66 km 2 ) in southern Brazil were used. The correlations for all the coefficients and for the exponents of depth and velocity of AHG relations were strong. Other results were confirmed: (i) there is a strong linear correlation between bankfull width and the AHG width coefficient; (ii) the hydraulic depth exponent and coefficient κ from generalized hydraulic equation are well predicted using relations between exponents and coefficients of AHG. The test of the hypotheses of the Leopold-Maddock and Dingman hydraulic geometry shows similar results and can be used to estimate discharge. However, the Leopold-Maddock method is simpler to apply from field measurements.
ISSN:0262-6667
2150-3435
DOI:10.1080/02626667.2021.1925285