PDF(2875 KB)
The Influence of Anisotropy of Soil Hydraulic Conductivity on Rainfall-runoff Process in a Mountainous Catchment in Southwest China
Cang-yi CHEN, Qi-hua RAN, Lin LIU, Hai-long PAN, Sheng YE
PDF(2875 KB)
The Influence of Anisotropy of Soil Hydraulic Conductivity on Rainfall-runoff Process in a Mountainous Catchment in Southwest China
The anisotropy of soil hydraulic conductivity is widespread in nature， but the influence of such soil characteristics on runoff generation is not considered in most studies， making it difficult to reproduce the hydrograph of real flood events. In this paper， a physics-based model （InHM） is applied to Jianpinggou， a mountainous catchment in China， to simulate the rainfall-runoff process under different scenarios of anisotropic hydraulic conductivity. The results show that the anisotropy of soil hydraulic conductivity have a significant impact on the runoff process. With the increase in anisotropic ratio（Kr）， the peak discharge can be substantially elevated： when Kr is 10， it can be 70% higher than the isotropic base case. In addition， under the condition of larger Kr value， the peak occurrence time is also relatively earlier. These impacts can be attributed to the increased flow velocity both at the hillslope and under stream channel due to the larger Kr， which drains more soil water down the hillslope and recharges streamflow in the channel. Our results suggest that the anisotropy of soil hydraulic conductivity cannot be ignored， and reasonable consideration of anisotropy in hydrological simulation can improve the accuracy of rainfall runoff simulation， which has important application value for flash flood early warning and prediction.
mountainous catchment / soil hydraulic conductivity / anisotropy / InHM {{custom_keyword}} /
Tab.1 Comparison between vertical and horizontal hydraulic conductivity of sampling points表1 各采样点土壤纵向和横向渗透系数对比 |
| 采样点号 | Kv /（m·s-1） | Kh /（m·s-1） | Kr （Kh/Kv ） |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.44×10-5 | 3.20×10-4 | 7.21 |
| 2 | 2.35×10-5 | 6.53×10-6 | 0.28 |
| 3 | 9.05×10-6 | 6.20×10-6 | 0.69 |
| 4 | 3.04×10-4 | 1.91×10-5 | 0.06 |
Tab.2 The porosity and saturated hydraulic conductivity used in the model表2 模型设定中的土壤饱和渗透系数和孔隙率 |
| 分区 | 土壤分层 | 饱和渗透系数/（m·s-1） | 孔隙率 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ⅰ （>1 300 m） | 表层（0~0.5 m） | 2.35×10-5 | 0.51 |
| 中间层（0.5~3 m） | 1.86×10-4 | 0.45 | |
| 底层（3~13 m） | 1.00×10-8 | 0.30 | |
| Ⅱ （1 180~1 300 m） | 表层（0~0.5 m） | 1.44×10-5 | 0.61 |
| 中间层（0.5~3 m） | 1.86×10-4 | 0.45 | |
| 底层（3~13 m） | 1.00×10-8 | 0.30 | |
| Ⅲ （<1 180 m） | 表层（0~0.5 m） | 9.79×10-5 | 0.65 |
| 中间层（0.5~3 m） | 1.86×10-4 | 0.45 | |
| 底层（3~13 m） | 1.00×10-8 | 0.30 |
Tab.3 The simulated scenarios with different anisotropy表3 不同各向异性比工况 |
| 模拟工况 | Kh /（m·s-1） | Kv /（m·s-1） | Kr（Kh/Kv） |
|---|---|---|---|
| 工况1 | 1.86×10-3 | 1.86×10-4 | 10 |
| 工况2 | 9.30×10-4 | 1.86×10-4 | 5 |
| 工况3 | 3.72×10-4 | 1.86×10-4 | 2 |
| 基础工况 | 1.86×10-4 | 1.86×10-4 | 1 |
| 工况4 | 9.30×10-5 | 1.86×10-4 | 1/2 |
| 工况5 | 3.72×10-5 | 1.86×10-4 | 1/5 |
| 工况6 | 1.86×10-5 | 1.86×10-4 | 1/10 |
| 1 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 2 |
陈勇，汤用泉. 考虑材料渗透性各向异性的土石坝渗流分析［J］. 南水北调与水利科技， 2014，12（4）：161-164，172.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 3 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 4 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 5 |
梁燕，邢鲜丽，李同录，等. 晚更新世黄土渗透性的各向异性及其机制研究［J］. 岩土力学， 2012，33（5）：1 313-1 318.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 6 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 7 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 8 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 9 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 10 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 11 |
胡瑞，曾胜. 材料的各向异性对渗流场的影响分析［J］. 三峡大学学报（ 自然科学版），2010，32（1）：17-19.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 12 |
周鹏鹏，李国敏，石景熙，等. 渗透系数各向异性对地下水封洞室涌水量影响的数值模拟分析［J］. 工程勘察，2011（5）：36-40.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 13 |
曾文西，肖新辉. 土质边坡在渗透系数各向异性条件下的稳定性分析［J］. 中外公路，2017，37（3）：10-14.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 14 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 15 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 16 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 17 |
褚胜名，余摇斌，李摇丽，等. “8·13”碱坪沟泥石流形成机理及特征研究［J］. 中国水土保持，2011（8）： 52-54.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 18 |
邓太平. “5.12”地震前后龙池地区泥石流发育特征及防治对策研究［D］. 成都：成都理工大学， 2011.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 19 |
余斌，马煜，张健楠，等. 汶川地震后四川省都江堰市龙池镇群发泥石流灾害［J］. 山地学报，2011，29（6）：738-746.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 20 |
张丝苇. 基于大尺度粒子图像测速技术的山区河道流量测验研究［D］. 杭州：浙江大学， 2019.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 21 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 22 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 23 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 24 |
冉启华，富强，苏丹阳，等. 降雨移动方向对坡面径流的影响机理［J］. 浙江大学学报（工学版）， 2009，43（10）：1 915-1 922.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 25 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 26 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 27 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 28 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 29 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 30 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 31 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 32 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 33 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 34 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 35 |
钱群. 中国西部湿润山区小流域水文响应过程：以四川龙溪河流域为例［D］. 杭州：浙江大学， 2014.
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 36 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 37 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 38 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| 39 |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
| {{custom_ref.label}} |
{{custom_citation.content}}
{{custom_citation.annotation}}
|
PDF(2875 KB)
Fig.1 Location and river network of study area
Tab.1 Comparison between vertical and horizontal hydraulic conductivity of sampling pointsFig.2 Finite-element meshes for the Jianpinggou catchmentTab.2 The porosity and saturated hydraulic conductivity used in the modelFig.3 Comparison between the observed and simulated peak runoff for the selected eventsTab.3 The simulated scenarios with different anisotropyFig.4 Simulated hydrograph at the outlet under different scenariosFig.5 Scatter plots between the anisotropic ratio （Kr） and time to peak discharge， peak discharge and total dischargeFig.6 Spatial distributions of surface water depth （D） at the peak time under different Kr scenariosFig.7 Longitudinal profile of flow velocity and flow direction under different Kr scenariosFig.8 Longitudinal profile of flow velocity along the stream channel BB′ under different Kr scenarios
鄂公网安备 42010602001274号 鄂ICP备14015464号-1/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
