Development of a Development of a DHSVM Erosion and DHSVM Erosion and Sediment Transport Sediment Transport

ModelModel

Colleen O. Doten, University of WashingtonColleen O. Doten, University of WashingtonLaura C. Bowling, Purdue UniversityLaura C. Bowling, Purdue UniversityEdwin D. Mauer, Santa Clara UniversityEdwin D. Mauer, Santa Clara UniversityJordan S. Lanini, University of Washington Jordan S. Lanini, University of Washington Nathalie Voisin, University of WashingtonNathalie Voisin, University of WashingtonDennis P. Lettenmaier, University of WashingtonDennis P. Lettenmaier, University of Washington

Presented by Jordan S. Lanini, University of Washington

Presentation outlinePresentation outline

• Motivation for erosion modelMotivation for erosion model• Mass wasting componentMass wasting component• Surface erosion componentSurface erosion component• Channel erosion and routing Channel erosion and routing

componentcomponent• Testing and evaluationTesting and evaluation• Future research directionsFuture research directions

Motivation for erosion Motivation for erosion modelmodel

Forest FireForest Fire

Timber Timber HarvestHarvest

Forest Forest RoadsRoads

www.homefirefightingsystems.com

DHSVM SURFACE EROSION

CHANNEL EROSION & ROUTING

Watershed Sediment Module

OUTPUT

Q

Qsed

Provides Inputs for all Three Components MASS WASTING

Watershed Sediment Module

Sediment Model Sediment Model

DHSVM Inputs to Sediment DHSVM Inputs to Sediment ModelModel

DHSVM

Soil Moisture Content

MASS WASTING

SURFACE EROSION

CHANNEL EROSION & ROUTING

Channel FlowPrecipitationLeaf Drip

Infiltration and Saturation Excess Runoff

Mass Mass WastingWasting

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/research/becweb/zone-MH/mh-photos/

• Dynamic soil Dynamic soil saturation saturation predicted by predicted by DHSVMDHSVM

• Finer resolution Finer resolution grid (10 m) for grid (10 m) for failure failure computationcomputation

Icicle Creek, WAIcicle Creek, WAL. Bowling, C. L. Bowling, C. DotenDoten

Mass Wasting Module (MWM)

• Slope stability is a function of soil moisture, slope, and soil and vegetation characteristics.

• Failure is determined by the infinite slope stability model, using a factor of safety (FS)

• Slope instability is indicated by a FS < 1.Slope instability is indicated by a FS < 1.

resisting forces

driving forcesFS =

L. Bowling, C. Doten

MWM - Stochastic NatureMWM - Stochastic Nature

• Four soil and vegetation characteristics:Four soil and vegetation characteristics:– soil cohesion,soil cohesion,– angle of internal friction, angle of internal friction, – root cohesion, and root cohesion, and – vegetation surchargevegetation surcharge

are input as probability distributions.are input as probability distributions.• They can be assigned to one of three They can be assigned to one of three

distributions:distributions:– uniform, uniform, – normal or normal or – triangular.triangular.

L. BowlingL. Bowling

Results of a Stochastic RunResults of a Stochastic Run

Probability of failure

L. BowlingL. Bowling

Pixels in black failed at least once in 1000 iterations of MWM

MWM - Mass RedistributionMWM - Mass Redistribution• Pixels are considered to fail to Pixels are considered to fail to

bedrock.bedrock.

• Failed material travels down the Failed material travels down the slope of steepest descent.slope of steepest descent.

• Downslope pixels can fail in Downslope pixels can fail in response to the initial failure.response to the initial failure.

• Landslide stops at a critical slope Landslide stops at a critical slope angle. The failed volume is angle. The failed volume is evenly distributed among all evenly distributed among all downslope pixels.downslope pixels.

• Landslides entering channels Landslides entering channels system continue as debris flows system continue as debris flows depending on the junction angle.depending on the junction angle.

L. BowlingL. Bowling

Surface Erosion & RoutingSurface Erosion & Routing

http:www.geo.uni-bonn.de/cgi-bin/geodynamik_main?Rubrik=research&Punkt=geomorphology

Current DHSVM Runoff Generation and Current DHSVM Runoff Generation and RoutingRouting

Runoff is produced via:

• Saturation excess (pixels 6 and 7)

• Infiltration excess based on a user-specified static maximum infiltration capacity (pixel 3)

Runoff is routed to the downslope neighbors one pixel/time step

Runoff Generation – Dynamic Runoff Generation – Dynamic Infiltration ExcessInfiltration Excess

• Calculation of maximum infiltration Calculation of maximum infiltration capacity: capacity: – The first timestep there is surface water on the The first timestep there is surface water on the

pixel, all surface water infiltrates.pixel, all surface water infiltrates.

– If there is surface water in the next timestep, If there is surface water in the next timestep, the maximum infiltration capacity is calculated the maximum infiltration capacity is calculated based on the amount previously infiltrated.based on the amount previously infiltrated.

• Dominant form of runoff generation on Dominant form of runoff generation on unpaved roads and post burn land surfaces unpaved roads and post burn land surfaces

N. VoisinN. Voisin

Kinematic Runoff RoutingKinematic Runoff Routing

• Pixel to pixel overland flow routed using an Pixel to pixel overland flow routed using an explicit finite difference solution of the explicit finite difference solution of the kinematic wave approximation to the Saint-kinematic wave approximation to the Saint-Venant equationsVenant equations

• Manning’s equation is used to solve for flow Manning’s equation is used to solve for flow area in terms of dischargearea in terms of discharge

• Per DHSVM timestep, a new solution sub-Per DHSVM timestep, a new solution sub-timestep is calculated satisfying the Courant timestep is calculated satisfying the Courant condition, which is necessary for solution condition, which is necessary for solution stability.stability.

L. BowlingL. Bowling

Surface ErosionSurface Erosion

• Transportable Transportable sediment is the sediment is the sum of particles sum of particles detached by three detached by three mechanisms mechanisms

• Erosion is limited Erosion is limited by overland flow by overland flow transport capacity transport capacity

shearing by overland flow

leaf dripimpact

raindropimpact

Mechanisms of Soil Particle DetachmentL. Bowling, J. L. Bowling, J. Lanini, N. Voisin Lanini, N. Voisin

Hillslope Sediment RoutingHillslope Sediment Routing

• Sediment is routed using a four-point Sediment is routed using a four-point finite difference solution of the two-finite difference solution of the two-dimensional conservation of mass dimensional conservation of mass equation.equation.

• If the pixel contains aIf the pixel contains achannel (including road side channel (including road side ditches), all sediment and ditches), all sediment and water enters the channelwater enters the channelsegment. segment.

sediment and water

L. BowlingL. Bowling

Forest Road ErosionForest Road Erosion• Transportable Transportable

sediment consists sediment consists of particles of particles detached by two detached by two mechanisms mechanisms

• Overland flow will Overland flow will be infiltration be infiltration excess generated.excess generated.

• Routing to include Routing to include road crown typeroad crown type– inslopedinsloped– outslopedoutsloped– crownedcrowned

raindrop impact

shearing byoverland flow

surface erosion

C. DotenC. Doten

Channel Erosion & RoutingChannel Erosion & Routing

www.eas.purdue.edu/geomorph/ envben.html

Channel RoutingChannel Routing

• Sediment SupplySediment Supply– channel sediment storage from the MWMchannel sediment storage from the MWM

– lateral inflow from hillslope and roadslateral inflow from hillslope and roads

– upstream channel segmentupstream channel segment

• Sediment particles Sediment particles – have a constant lognormally distributed grain have a constant lognormally distributed grain

size which is a function of the user-specified size which is a function of the user-specified median grain size diameter (dmedian grain size diameter (d5050)) and dand d9090

– are binned into a user-specified number of are binned into a user-specified number of grain size classesgrain size classes

E. MaurerE. Maurer

Channel RoutingChannel Routing

• Sediment is routed using a four-point Sediment is routed using a four-point finite difference solution of the two-finite difference solution of the two-dimensional conservation of mass dimensional conservation of mass equation.equation.

• Instantaneous upstream and downstream Instantaneous upstream and downstream flow rates are used in the routing.flow rates are used in the routing.

• Transport depends on Transport depends on – available sediment in each grain size class, andavailable sediment in each grain size class, and

– capacity of flow for each grain size calculated capacity of flow for each grain size calculated using Bagnold’s approach for total sediment load.using Bagnold’s approach for total sediment load.

E. MaurerE. Maurer

Testing and EvaluationTesting and Evaluation

Little Wenatchee

Sensitivity Analysis - Rainy Sensitivity Analysis - Rainy CreekCreek

Input ParameterInput Parameter BaselineBaseline MinMin MaxMax SensitivitySensitivity References)References)

effective soil cohesion, kPaeffective soil cohesion, kPa 33 0.250.25 100100 highhigh Hammond Hammond et al. et al. (1992)(1992)Lindeburg (2001)Lindeburg (2001)

effective angle of internal effective angle of internal friction, degreesfriction, degrees

3131 2828 3434 highhigh Hammond Hammond et al.et al. (1992) (1992)Holtz and Kovacs (1981)Holtz and Kovacs (1981)Lindeburg (2001)Lindeburg (2001)

root cohesion, kPa root cohesion, kPa (5% of basin)(5% of basin)(90% of basin)(90% of basin)

331515

221212

662323

highhighlowlow

Hammond Hammond et al.et al. (1992) (1992)

vegetation surcharge, kg/mvegetation surcharge, kg/m22 (5% of basin)(5% of basin)(90% of basin)(90% of basin)

12.512.5122122

004949

252519951995

lowlowlowlow

Sidle (1992)Sidle (1992)aa

Hammond Hammond et al.et al. (1992) (1992)

soil bulk density (kg/msoil bulk density (kg/m33)) 15691569 14001400 16001600 mediummedium STATSGO (USDA, 1994)STATSGO (USDA, 1994)

soil depth (m)soil depth (m) 0.76-0.76-1.2781.278

BaselineBaseline 1.76-1.76-2.2782.278

highhigh bb

MWM Application MWM Application ChallengesChallenges

• Soil depthSoil depth– typically a hydrologic calibration parametertypically a hydrologic calibration parameter– changes in soil depth will impact mass changes in soil depth will impact mass

wastingwasting• Soil moisture Soil moisture

– mass wasting model uses soil moisture in mass wasting model uses soil moisture in each pixel at a daily time stepeach pixel at a daily time step

– unrealistic degrees of saturation are going to unrealistic degrees of saturation are going to effect mass wasting effect mass wasting

C. DotenC. Doten

Surface Erosion Application Surface Erosion Application ChallengesChallenges

• Model resolutionModel resolution– smaller resolutions will result in smaller sub-time step, smaller resolutions will result in smaller sub-time step,

increasing run timeincreasing run time• Runoff (Infiltration Excess)Runoff (Infiltration Excess)

– Sub-timestep calculated from largest infiltration Sub-timestep calculated from largest infiltration excess observed for time stepexcess observed for time step

– unrealistic values will result in smaller sub-time step, unrealistic values will result in smaller sub-time step, increasing run timeincreasing run time

• Surface erosion run timeSurface erosion run time– since mass wasting is the predominant form of since mass wasting is the predominant form of

sediment transport in PNW basin, surface erosion can sediment transport in PNW basin, surface erosion can be limited to user-specified time periods decreasing be limited to user-specified time periods decreasing run timerun time

C. Doten, J. LaniniC. Doten, J. Lanini

Testing and EvaluationTesting and Evaluation

• Mass wastingMass wasting– Land slide mapping of Rainy Creek derived Land slide mapping of Rainy Creek derived

from aerial photographyfrom aerial photography• Surface erosion Surface erosion

– Observed local and regional land and road Observed local and regional land and road surface erosion rates surface erosion rates

• Channel routingChannel routing– Observed stream sediment concentrationsObserved stream sediment concentrations

C. DotenC. Doten

Scenario Analyses I: Forest Scenario Analyses I: Forest RoadsRoads

Road Location in the Road Location in the Hillslope & Hillslope Hillslope & Hillslope

CurvatureCurvature

Forest Road ErosionForest Road Erosion

C. DotenC. Doten

Scenario Analyses II: Timber Harvest Scenario Analyses II: Timber Harvest and Forest Fireand Forest Fire

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/research/becweb/zone-MH/12_Res_Man.htm

Enhanced Transport CapacityEnhanced Transport Capacity• Decrease in annual Decrease in annual

evaporationevaporation• Increased snow accumulationIncreased snow accumulation• Enhanced snow meltEnhanced snow melt

– Greater radiation exposureGreater radiation exposure– Increased turbulent energy Increased turbulent energy

transfertransfer

Enhanced Sediment SupplyEnhanced Sediment Supply• Mass wasting (landslides)Mass wasting (landslides)

– Decreased root strengthDecreased root strength– Enhanced soil moistureEnhanced soil moisture

• Surface erosionSurface erosion

C. DotenC. Doten

Questions/CommentsQuestions/Comments

We would like to acknowledge financial support from the USFS PNW Research Station and Wenatchee Lab for the development of this model

Data Input Needed for Data Input Needed for Sediment ModelSediment Model

• Smaller resolution (10m) DEMSmaller resolution (10m) DEM

• Debris Flow Material dDebris Flow Material d5050 and d and d9090

• Soils: Bulk Density, Manning n, K index, dSoils: Bulk Density, Manning n, K index, d5050, , distributions (mean, stand deviation, distributions (mean, stand deviation, minimum value, maximum value) of minimum value, maximum value) of Cohesion and Angle of Internal FrictionCohesion and Angle of Internal Friction

• Vegetation: Vegetation Surcharge Vegetation: Vegetation Surcharge distribution (minimum value and maximum distribution (minimum value and maximum value) and Root Cohesion distribution value) and Root Cohesion distribution (mode, minimum value and maximum value)(mode, minimum value and maximum value)

ReferencesReferences• Bagnold, R.A., 1966, An approach of sediment transport model from general physics. US Geol. Bagnold, R.A., 1966, An approach of sediment transport model from general physics. US Geol.

Survey Prof. Paper 422-J.Survey Prof. Paper 422-J.• Benda, L. and T. Dunne, 1997, Stochastic forcing of sediment supply to channel networks from Benda, L. and T. Dunne, 1997, Stochastic forcing of sediment supply to channel networks from

landsliding and debris flow, landsliding and debris flow, Wat. Resour. ResWat. Resour. Res, 33 (12), 2849-2863., 33 (12), 2849-2863.• Beven, K.J. and M.J. Kirkby, 1979, A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin Beven, K.J. and M.J. Kirkby, 1979, A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin

hydrology, Hydrol Sci Bull, 24, 43-69.hydrology, Hydrol Sci Bull, 24, 43-69.• Burton, A. and J.C. Bathurst, 1998, Physically based modeling of shallow landslide sediment yield at Burton, A. and J.C. Bathurst, 1998, Physically based modeling of shallow landslide sediment yield at

a catchment scale, Environmental Geology, 35 (2-3).a catchment scale, Environmental Geology, 35 (2-3).• Chow V.T., D.R. Maidment, L.W.Mays 1988: Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill Book Company pp572.Chow V.T., D.R. Maidment, L.W.Mays 1988: Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill Book Company pp572.• Epema G.F., H. Th. Riezebos 1983: Fall Velocity of waterdrops at different heights as a factor Epema G.F., H. Th. Riezebos 1983: Fall Velocity of waterdrops at different heights as a factor

influencing erosivity of simulated rain. Rainfall simulation, Runoff and Soil Erosion. Catena suppl. 4, influencing erosivity of simulated rain. Rainfall simulation, Runoff and Soil Erosion. Catena suppl. 4, Braunschweig. Jan de Ploey (Ed).Braunschweig. Jan de Ploey (Ed).

• Everaert, W., 1991, Empirical relations for the sediment transport capacity of interill flow, Earth Everaert, W., 1991, Empirical relations for the sediment transport capacity of interill flow, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 16, 513-532.Surface Processes and Landforms, 16, 513-532.

• Exner, F. M., 1925, Über die wechselwirkung zwischen wasser und geschiebe in flüssen, Sitzungber. Exner, F. M., 1925, Über die wechselwirkung zwischen wasser und geschiebe in flüssen, Sitzungber. Acad. Wissenscaften Wien Math. Naturwiss. Abt. 2a, 134, 165–180.Acad. Wissenscaften Wien Math. Naturwiss. Abt. 2a, 134, 165–180.

• Graf, W., 1971, Hydraulics of Sediment Transport, McGraw-Hill, NY, NY, pp. 208-211.Graf, W., 1971, Hydraulics of Sediment Transport, McGraw-Hill, NY, NY, pp. 208-211.• Grayson R.B., Blöschl G. and I.D. Moore : Distributed parameter hydrologic modeling using vector Grayson R.B., Blöschl G. and I.D. Moore : Distributed parameter hydrologic modeling using vector

elevation data: THALES and TAPES-C. Chapter 19 in: Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, elevation data: THALES and TAPES-C. Chapter 19 in: Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, Water Resources Publication, Highland Ranch, Colorado. p669-696.Water Resources Publication, Highland Ranch, Colorado. p669-696.

• Hammond, C., D. Hall, S. Miller and P. Swetik, 1992, Level I Stability Analysis (LISA) Documentation Hammond, C., D. Hall, S. Miller and P. Swetik, 1992, Level I Stability Analysis (LISA) Documentation for version 2.0, USDA Intermoutain Research Station, General Technical Report INT-285.for version 2.0, USDA Intermoutain Research Station, General Technical Report INT-285.

References (con’t)References (con’t)• Komura, W., 1961, Bulk properties of river sediments and its application to sediment hydraulics, Komura, W., 1961, Bulk properties of river sediments and its application to sediment hydraulics,

Proc. Jap. Nat. Cong. For Appl. Mech.Proc. Jap. Nat. Cong. For Appl. Mech.• Morgan, R.P.C., J.N. Qinton, R.E. Smith, G. Govers, J.W.A. Poesen, K. Auerswald, G. Chisci, D. Torri Morgan, R.P.C., J.N. Qinton, R.E. Smith, G. Govers, J.W.A. Poesen, K. Auerswald, G. Chisci, D. Torri

and M.E. Styczen, 1998, The European soil erosion model (EUROSEM): a dynamic approach for and M.E. Styczen, 1998, The European soil erosion model (EUROSEM): a dynamic approach for predicting sediment transport from fields and small catchments, Earth Surface Processes and predicting sediment transport from fields and small catchments, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 23, 527-544.Landforms, 23, 527-544.

• Rubey, W.W., 1933, Settling velocities of gravels, sands, and silt particles, Am. Journal of Science, Rubey, W.W., 1933, Settling velocities of gravels, sands, and silt particles, Am. Journal of Science, 5th Series, 25 (148), 325-338.5th Series, 25 (148), 325-338.

• Shields, A., 1936, Application of similarity principles and turbulence research to bedload Shields, A., 1936, Application of similarity principles and turbulence research to bedload movement. Hydrodynamic Lab. Rep. 167, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif.movement. Hydrodynamic Lab. Rep. 167, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif.

• Smith R.E. and J.Y. Parlange 1978: A parameter-efficient hydrologic infiltration model. Smith R.E. and J.Y. Parlange 1978: A parameter-efficient hydrologic infiltration model. Wat. Resour. Wat. Resour. Res.Res. 14(3), 533-538. 14(3), 533-538.

• Smith R.E., D.C. Goodrich, D.A. Woolhiser, and C.L. Unkrich 1995: KINEROS – a kinematic runoff and Smith R.E., D.C. Goodrich, D.A. Woolhiser, and C.L. Unkrich 1995: KINEROS – a kinematic runoff and erosion model. Chapter 20 in: Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, Water Resources erosion model. Chapter 20 in: Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, Water Resources Publication, Highland Ranch, Colorado. p697-732.Publication, Highland Ranch, Colorado. p697-732.

• Sturm, T., 2001, Open Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, NY, NY, pp. 378-380.Sturm, T., 2001, Open Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, NY, NY, pp. 378-380.• Wicks, J.M. and J.C. Bathurst, 1996, SHESED: a physically based, distributed erosion and sediment Wicks, J.M. and J.C. Bathurst, 1996, SHESED: a physically based, distributed erosion and sediment

yield component for the SHE hydrological modeling system, Journal of Hydrology, 175, 213-238.yield component for the SHE hydrological modeling system, Journal of Hydrology, 175, 213-238.• Wigmosta, M.S., and D.P. Lettenmaier, 1999, A Comparison of Simplified Methods for Routing Wigmosta, M.S., and D.P. Lettenmaier, 1999, A Comparison of Simplified Methods for Routing

Topographically-Driven Subsurface Flow, Topographically-Driven Subsurface Flow, Wat. Resour. Res.Wat. Resour. Res., 35, 255-264., 35, 255-264.• Wolohiser, D.A., R.E. Smith and D.C. Goodrich, 1990, KINEROS, A kinematic runoff and erosion Wolohiser, D.A., R.E. Smith and D.C. Goodrich, 1990, KINEROS, A kinematic runoff and erosion

model: documentation and user manual, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, ARS-77, 130 pp.model: documentation and user manual, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, ARS-77, 130 pp.