黄土丘陵沟壑区人类活动对流域系统侵蚀、输移和沉积的影响

从长期来看,在治理度达到70%条件下与治理前相比泥沙输移比减小50%左右,治理的效益是十分显著的。在治理的过程中,与治理前相比泥沙输移比变幅明显减小,但在短期内由于暴雨洪水侵蚀力大于工程设计标准而发生毁、垮坝或淤平后,仍可以将前期滞留的泥沙重新搬运而出现泥沙输移比大于1的情况。在黄土高原地区治理前后流域系统次暴雨泥沙输移比均可用径流深度比来定量计算获得,泥沙输移比变化的动力机制可用径流深度增与减时水流剪切力的变化来解释     

黄土丘陵沟壑区流域系统侵蚀与产沙关系

从长期来看流域系统的侵蚀与产沙基本可以达到平衡,泥沙输移比约等于１。但次降雨或分年度泥沙输移比有相当大的变幅,在短期内会经常存在泥沙的滞留和滞留的泥沙被重新锓蚀搬运,而出现泥沙输移比小于１和大于１的情况。这主要与降雨的空间分布和洪峰增减幅度及径流深度增减幅度密切相关。流域系统次降雨泥沙输移比及各级沟道含沙水流的挟沙能力变化可用单位面积上洪峰增减幅度变化时暴雨洪水的剪切力的转化机制来描述。     

无定河流域的人工沉积汇及其 对泥沙输移比的影响

依据1956~1996年的资料,计算出了无定河流域历年的人工沉积汇、侵蚀量、泥沙输移比,进行了时间序列分析,并运用回归分析方法,建立了统计关系,揭示了无定河流域人工沉积汇对泥沙输移比的影响。研究表明,无定河流域侵蚀量和产沙量有明显的减小趋势;人工沉积汇先是增大,达到峰值后再减小;泥沙输移比先减小而后增大。这说明,无定河泥沙输移比的时间变化趋势,主要受人工沉积汇的控制。建立的多元回归方程表明,坝地面积增大对流域泥沙输移比减小的贡献最大;地表径流系数减小对流域泥沙输移比减小的贡献居第二位;在3个降水因子中,最大30日降水的贡献最大,汛期降水次之,最大1日降水再次之。在坡面措施和沟道措施中,沟道措施对流域泥沙输移比减小的影响要大于坡面措施。     

泥沙输移比影响因子及其关系模型 研究现状与评述

泥沙输移比是目前预测流域产沙量的一种较实用的方法,本文介绍了国内外泥沙输移比研究的主要成果。分析并总结了泥沙输移比与流域面积、降雨／径流、地质地貌及泥沙颗粒因子之间的影响关系及其关系模型。最后,结合我国泥沙输移比研究的实际情况,提出了我国今后一定时期内在泥沙输移比研究方面的发展设想。     

陕南河流泥沙输移比问题

通过分析陕南河流泥沙的输移比现状、输移比的时空变化及发展趋势,指出在特定的自然地理条件下,泥沙中推移质比例较大,致使该区泥沙输移比远小于１,这是陕南河流泥沙运移的重要特征;输移比在空间上有明显差异并且沿程逐渐增大。从时间上看,自５０年代以来,输移比有不断减小的趋势,今后一段时间,随着区内河流径流量的减少和人为侵蚀作用的加剧,泥沙输移比仍会减小。     

三峡水库修建前长江宜昌-武汉段泥沙输移比及其影响因子

运用泥沙收支平衡(Sediment budget)的概念确定长江中游宜昌-武汉河段的泥沙输移比,并运用数理统计方法,研究了1955～1997年间河道泥沙输移比对水沙变化的响应.从总体上看,河道泥沙输移比有较显著的增大趋势.输移比的变化可分为4个阶段:1955～1962年为快速增大;1963～1975年亦为增大,但增速减慢;1976～1979年为迅速减小;1980～1997年为较快增大.在分析了若干水沙指标对河道泥沙输移比的影响的基础上,建立了宜昌-汉口河段泥沙输移比与宜昌站的来水量和来沙量以及3口分水比和分沙比、宜昌站洪峰流量之间的多元回归方程.1980～1997年间的方程表明,宜昌站来水量越多、3口分流比越小,宜昌一汉口河段泥沙输移比越大;宜昌站来沙量越少,3口分沙比越大,泥沙输移比越大;宜昌站洪水流量越大,泥沙输移比越小.     

黄土塬区坡面及小集水区泥沙输移比变化特征

文章首先推荐了计算泥沙输移比SDR时，所需侵蚀量、输移量的量测方法：侵蚀量用坡长为20m（水平距）、宽5m直线坡，在不同降雨及土地利用下，通过小区出口断面的泥沙量；输移量为坡长大于20m的径流小区小集水区出口处的拦蓄量。然后通过黄土塬区坡面坡度为9%的30m、40m、60m径流小区9年野外实验所得45组有效数据的分析，发现单宽最小径流率qmin和最大含沙量ρmax可判别坡面泥沙侵蚀与输移的对比关系，即输移比SDR，并依据这些参数值，可将侵蚀输移状态划分为“侵蚀——输移区”，“侵蚀——堆积——输移区”和“侵蚀——输移挠动区”3个侵蚀输移状态类型区，同时通过研究给出了各区之间过度转换临界值的计算公式，即ρmax=11.96 0.117qmin和qmin=0.187ρmax-85.676。并能过对21条塬面不同面积（0.5hm^2-41.3hm^2）、坡长（30m-965m)小集水区淤积（输移量）的测量，将测量值与标准小区侵蚀量作对比，计算出各自的输移比SDR，并分别建立了SDR与坡长L、SDR与集水面积A的关系式，即SDR=2.85L^-0.306和SDR=0.735A^-0.151，为快速估算塬面小集水区泥沙输移比SDR值提供了方便。最后，分析了植被覆盖、土壤含水状况、人为活动等其它基因素对泥沙输移比SDR的影响。     

珠江河口潮周期泥沙动态输移特征遥感反演分析

珠江河口属粤港澳大湾区核心水域,战略位置重要,区内河网密布交错,河道、河口区径流与潮流相互作用,泥沙运动较为复杂。泥沙输移是河床演变的物质来源,直接关系到粤港澳大湾区防洪、供水、航运安全。文章利用高分四号卫星高频次影像数据开展珠江河口区潮周期内水表层泥沙定量反演,结合野外观测数据,以枯季2019-12-28及洪季2020-06-20两期多时相数据为例,探究潮周期内珠江河口泥沙含量时空分布。结果表明,高分四号卫星影像数据大气校正平均绝对百分比误差为18.85%;基于高分四号卫星影像数据近红外、红波段与蓝波段比值构建了泥沙反演模型,实现对珠江河口区间隔2 h日变化尺度泥沙输移连续动态监测,其中洪、枯季最优模型MAPE误差分别为30.00%、23.54%。反演结果能较为形象地展示河口区整体泥沙动态输移特征,与实测站点泥沙质量浓度相比,反演结果在潮周期泥沙质量浓度变化趋势上相一致,实现了珠江河口区径潮作用下面上泥沙动态输移的特征分析。该方法为复杂河口泥沙输移大范围业务化监测提供了新的思路,同时为珠江河口泥沙输移数值模拟与遥感监测提供了交叉验证的新思路。     

陕西河流泥沙输移比问题

通过分析陕西南河流泥沙的输移 比现状,输移比的时空变化及发展趋势,指出在特定的自然地理条件下,泥沙中推移质比例较大,致使该区泥输移经远小于１,这是陕南河流泥沙运移的重要特征;输移比在空间上有明显差异并且沿程逐渐增大。     

瓯江河口输沙模式与应用研究*

本文从河口塑造与输沙关系、流域泄沙与输移模式,以及口外来沙与潮流输移特征等三方面,探讨河口区的泥沙运移规律和补给来源。并在此基础上,提出粗细不同粒级的造床泥沙按不同方式治理的设想。     

Relationship between erosion and sediment yield in drainage basins of loess gully-hilly areas

From a long-term point of view, the balance between erosion and sediment yield in a drainage system can basically realize, i.e., the delivery ratio can be close to 1. However, substantial variations among individual rainfall events or between annual delivery ratio exist, causing frequent sediment retaining or re-erosion and re-delivery of the retained sediments in a short period of time. Thus the delivery ratio will be < 1 or > 1. The sediment delivery ratio is closely related to the spatial distribution of rainfall and magnitude of rise and fall of peak flood and that of runoff depth in the drainage system. Delivery ratio of single event in a drainage system and changes of delivery capacity of silt-laden runoff in various classes of gullies can be expressed by transformation mechanism of shear force of a single rainstorm event with flood resulting from increase and decrease of peak flood per unit area.     

Relationship between erosion and sediment yield in drainage basins of loess gully-hilly areas

From a long-term point of view, the balance between erosion and sediment yield in a drainage system can basically realize, i.e., the delivery ratio can be close to 1. However, substantial variations among individual rainfall events or between annual delivery ratio exist, causing frequent sediment retaining or re-erosion and re-delivery of the retained sediments in a short period of time. Thus the delivery ratio will be < 1 or > 1. The sediment delivery ratio is closely related to the spatial distribution of rainfall and magnitude of rise and fall of peak flood and that of runoff depth in the drainage system. Delivery ratio of single event in a drainage system and changes of delivery capacity of silt-laden runoff in various classes of gullies can be expressed by transformation mechanism of shear force of a single rainstorm event with flood resulting from increase and decrease of peak flood per unit area.     

典型黄土坡面土壤侵蚀特征及径流流速空间变化试验研究

为了明确土壤性质对坡面侵蚀方式作用机制的影响,本研究采用室内模拟降雨试验,选取黄土高原典型暴雨强度,在不同坡度条件下,对两种黄土的坡面侵蚀方式、形态特征、产流产沙过程及其相应径流流速的变化规律进行了研究。结果表明,绥德土径流量明显高于安塞土,10º、15º和20º时前者的平均径流量分别比后者高出51.1%、55.5%和63.0%,且前者更易形成细沟,使得其平均含沙量和平均产沙率分别是后者的1.14~3.59倍和2.50~8.48倍。在片蚀阶段,与绥德土相比,安塞土的含沙量较高,后者的平均含沙量是前者的1.24~1.73倍,但两种土壤的含沙量和产沙规律相同,均表现为先快速增加到最大值,然后逐渐降低到相对稳定状态,该现象证明片蚀的初期阶段主要受控于径流输沙能力,后期受径流的剥蚀能力控制。在细沟侵蚀阶段,绥德土细沟发育以沟头溯源侵蚀为主,崩塌作用频繁,该侵蚀形式不仅控制着细沟形态的总体特征,也导致含沙量和产沙率均急剧增加,该阶段平均含沙量是相应片蚀阶段的3.25~4.34倍。细沟沟口下方坡面存在明显的泥沙沉积带,表明细沟集中水流的搬运能力远高于坡面漫流,细沟侵蚀主要受径流输沙能力控制。两种土壤的径流流速均表现为坡面下部高于坡面上部,径流稳定后高于径流稳定前,总体来看,绥德土和安塞土上坡和径流稳定后的平均流速分别是下坡和径流稳定前的1.4倍、1.25倍和1.75倍、1.29倍,此外细沟侵蚀或侵蚀强度与微地貌形态之间的互馈作用对径流流速也有较大影响。     

岔巴沟流域次暴雨产沙统计模型

流域综合治理规划、防治土壤侵蚀、合理利用水沙资源 ,无不需要掌握流域产沙情况。流域产沙统计模型结构简单 ,计算方便 ,是现有产沙预报的强有力工具。本文以陕西省岔巴沟流域及其支流实测降雨水文资料为基础 ,系统地分析了流域产沙的降雨、径流、地貌因子在流域产沙中的作用 ,进而将影响产沙的因素概括为径流深、洪峰流量、流域面积、流域沟道密度 ,并作为产沙预报的指标 ,建立了岔巴沟流域次暴雨产沙的统计模型。经检验 ,该预报公式具有一定的精度。     

Erosion and sediment yields as influenced by coupled eolian and fluvial processes: The Yellow River,China

Based on data from the middle Yellow River, a model of erosion and sediment yield is proposed to describe coupled eolian and fluvial processes in a transitional zone from arid to sub-humid climates, and to explain rapid erosion and a high sediment yield in the zone. In the study area, wind action predominates from March to June, which erodes weathered bedrock and transports eolian sand to gullies, river channels and floodplains. In the following summer, especially from July to September, rainstorm runoff in gullies and river channels transports large quantities of fine loessic material, in the form of hyperconcentrated flow. As a result, most of the previously stored eolian sand and material supplied by mass-wasting of loess can be transported to the major tributaries and the main stream of the Yellow River, resulting in the high specific sediment yield. There exists an optimal grain size composition which maximizes suspended sediment concentration in the study area, resulted from the combined wind–water processes.     

流域侵蚀产沙和物质转移*

联系当前全球土壤流失的现状,本文阐明研究侵蚀产沙和物质输移规律的重要性,从侵蚀产沙和物质输移的流域系统概念出发,并结合我国黄土高原的治理,扼要介绍国内外这一领域的研究概况.     

输沙量 、侵蚀量与泥沙输移比的流域尺度关系——以赣江流域为例

输沙量、侵蚀量与泥沙输移比的流域尺度转换研究是当前流域侵蚀产沙研究领域的前沿课题,旨在通过尺度转换理论将坡面小区试验研究成果转换到流域的更大范围。以赣江流域实测输沙量和计算侵蚀量与泥沙输移比数据为基础,探讨了该流域3个变量的流域尺度关系,进而研究分析了3个变量尺度转换的可能性。3个变量与流域面积的关系散点图和相关方程都反映了这3者与流域面积不存在明显的相关关系,相悖于前人反比关系的结论。文章还阐述了流域面积的内涵及输沙量、侵蚀量和输移比的影响因素与流域面积的关系,发现3个变量的影响因素与流域面积不存在尺度效应。由此推断在赣江流域输沙量、侵蚀量和泥沙输移比实现尺度转换存在的可能性不大。这一研究结论是否成立或是否具有普遍性意义还有待于更多流域的研究成果来进一步证实。     

黄土高原沟道流域产沙过程的初步分析

黄土高原的主要产沙地区是河口镇至龙门黄河干流两侧和泾、洛、渭河中上游,产沙时间集中7—9月或一、二次暴雨期。流域产沙量与河道断面输沙量基本一致。产沙最与降雨量加径流深组合因子成正比相关,并随坡度增大而增加,坡度超过25—28度水流面蚀强度减弱。砂黄土的可蚀性最大,黄土其次,粘黄土最小。灌木林的防蚀效果最好。近三十年来黄土高原的产沙量进一步增加,其中由人类活动而增加的沙量约占黄河平均输沙量的23～35%。沟道流域的产沙过程具有垂直分带规律。沟间地以细沟侵蚀产沙为主,沟谷地是水力、重力和洞穴侵蚀综合作用的场所。黄土丘陵区沟谷地的产沙量此沟间地大59.0%左右;黄土塬区产生的泥沙绝大部来自沟谷地。     

Erosion rates in badland areas recorded by collectors,erosion pins and profilometer techniques (Ebro Basin,NE-Spain)

In badland areas of the Ebro Basin, in a semiarid climate, two erosion plots (257 m²; 5° slope and 128 m²; 23° slope) on exposed Tertiary clays were monitored over two years (Nov. 1991–Nov. 1993). This material is characterized by high sodium absorption ratios which lead to high soil dispersivity. The dominant erosion processes in both plots are rilling and sheet erosion. Rainfall intensity was recorded at a weather station, connected to a data-logger, sediment production for single events was collected in tanks, and ground lowering was measured every six months by erosion pins and microtopographic profile gauge techniques. Significant runoff was produced only by rainfall events above 5 mm. Another threshold at 20 mm rain was noted. For rainfalls higher than 20 mm, the 23° slope plot shows a greater runoff response than the 5° one. Rainfall events exceeding this threshold showed a higher sediment production for the steeper slope. In the relationship between precipitation and sediment concentration, an envelope curve can be drawn indicating that any rainfall event of a given amount and intensity has a maximum sediment concentration which we speculate to be a function of the runoff sediment transport capacity. Runoff response and sediment yield in the studied plots are controlled by the rainfall and soil characteristics and their seasonal variations. In both plots, the erosion pins show that erosion rates in rill areas are 25–50% higher than in the interrill areas. Sediment yield recorded by collector devices was higher than the rates measured by erosion pins. The erosion rates based on rill cross-sections by profilometers were higher than the ones recorded by collectors.