PDF(1348 KB)
Dynamic-Geomorphic Coupling Mechanism Influencing Sediment Deposition Intensity in Tidal Estuarine Bar Fields:A Case Study of Spur Dike Fields in the North Passage of Yangtze River Estuary
ZHANG Gong-jin, QIAN Ming-xia, ZHU Xian-bo
Journal of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute ›› 2025, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (12) : 1-7.
PDF(1348 KB)
PDF(1348 KB)
Dynamic-Geomorphic Coupling Mechanism Influencing Sediment Deposition Intensity in Tidal Estuarine Bar Fields:A Case Study of Spur Dike Fields in the North Passage of Yangtze River Estuary
[Objective] This study centers on the dike fields of the spur dike group in the Yangtze River Estuary, a typical tidal estuary where complex water-sediment dynamics and diverse dike layouts jointly shape deposition processes. Its core objectives are twofold: first, to unravel the coupling mechanism through which dynamic factors (e.g., runoff, tides) and geomorphic parameters (e.g., dike spacing, initial water depth) jointly regulate sediment deposition intensity in tidal estuarine dike fields; second, to develop a reliable empirical formula for predicting such deposition intensity. By addressing the gap in existing research—where the integrated effects of dynamic and geomorphic factors are often overlooked—this study aims to provide robust theoretical support for optimizing the design of spur dike groups and enhancing the accuracy of deposition forecasting in the Yangtze River Estuary and analogous tidal estuarine systems worldwide. [Methods] The dike fields of the spur dike group in the north passage of the Yangtze River Estuary, a key area of the Yangtze River Estuary Deepwater Channel Regulation Project, were selected as the research focus. Long-term, systematic measured data were analyzed, including dike field topographic surveys, hydrological observations, and sediment monitoring records. Correlation analysis was first performed to examine how deposition intensity relates to key dynamic factors (upstream runoff from the Datong Hydrological Station, suspended sediment concentration, offshore tidal range, suspended sediment particle size) and critical geomorphic parameters (relative spacing of spur dikes, initial water depth of dike fields, spur dike length, dike field depth). Using dimensional analysis and the Buckingham π theorem, a comprehensive dynamic parameter was constructed by integrating the four dynamic factors, synthesizing their combined influence on water-sediment transport and deposition. Simultaneously, a set of geomorphic parameters was established, incorporating spur dike spacing, length, and dike field depth to quantify the impact of spur dike group layout and dike field topographic features on local flow patterns and sediment trapping. A power function model was then used to quantify the coupling relationship between the comprehensive dynamic parameter and geomorphic parameters, and an empirical formula for deposition intensity was derived. Finally, the formula was validated using measured data from representative dike fields, including those unaffected by subsequent engineering and those influenced by phased projects. [Results] 1) As the Yangtze River Estuary Deepwater Channel Regulation Project advanced through three phases, total sediment deposition in dike fields increased significantly (from 15.48×106 m3 in Phase I to 128.01×106 m3 in Phase II), confirming the spur dike group’s strong sediment-trapping effect. 2) Deposition intensity was positively correlated with runoff (higher runoff carries more sediment to dike fields) and sediment concentration (more available sediment for deposition), but negatively correlated with tidal range (larger tidal range strengthens ebb currents, enhancing offshore sediment transport) and sediment particle size (coarser particles settle before reaching dike fields or are easily resuspended by strong flows). 3) Among geomorphic parameters, initial dike field water depth showed a strong positive linear correlation with deposition intensity (deeper water provides more deposition space and reduces flow velocity, favoring sediment settlement), while spur dike relative spacing had weak correlation (R2=0.44), due to interactions with factors like flow blockage (too small spacing) or uneven energy distribution (too large spacing). 4) The comprehensive dynamic parameter correlated highly (R2=0.94) with annual deposition in undisturbed dike fields (TS1, TS2), effectively capturing dynamic drivers of deposition; geomorphic parameters correlated strongly (R2=0.96) with initial deposition, clearly distinguishing differences between dike fields in the same spur dike group. 5) The empirical formula showed excellent agreement with measured data: it matched well with the measured deposition intensity of TS1, TS2, and TS8 (used for fitting analysis) and effectively reflected the deposition intensity of TN7, TN8, and TN9 (used for validation in the second-phase project). Even for dike fields affected by phased engineering or new structures (e.g., a 21 km sediment barrier), the formula still successfully captured the overall deposition trend. [Conclusion] This study makes three key contributions: it innovatively integrates dynamic factors and geomorphic parameters into a unified analytical framework for Yangtze River Estuary spur dike group dike fields, overcoming the limitations of previous single-factor research; the constructed comprehensive dynamic parameter and geomorphic parameters effectively quantify the combined effects of water-sediment dynamics and dike layout/topography on deposition, making complex processes interpretable; the empirical formula, with high applicability and accuracy, offers a reliable tool for tidal estuarine dike field deposition prediction.
Yangtze River estuary / spur dike group / dike field / sediment deposition intensity / geomorphic parameters / comprehensive dynamic parameters
| [1] |
王任超, 张功瑾, 胡彩霞, 等. 潮汐河口丁坝布置对河床冲刷的影响研究[J]. 人民珠江, 2020, 41(1): 63-68.
(
|
| [2] |
范蕾. 丁坝群几何参数对支流斜交弯曲干流河道水流的影响[D]. 邯郸: 河北工程大学, 2014.
(
|
| [3] |
李溢汶, 吴巍巍, 代斌. 低含沙条件下长江口丁坝群冲淤及水动力变化特点[J]. 水运工程, 2025(1): 85-92.
(
|
| [4] |
楼亚颖. 长江口开敞型潮滩动力地貌过程研究[D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2022.
(
|
| [5] |
张功瑾, 杨明金, 王任超, 等. 长江口水沙条件对丁坝群坝田淤积的影响研究[J]. 水文, 2020, 40(6): 24-30, 50.
(
|
| [6] |
金镠. 丁坝群坝田与主流水沙交换与冲淤机理综述[J]. 水运工程, 2019(12): 80-85.
(
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
孙士勇. 上海港宝山作业区港池回淤分析[J]. 水运工程, 1997(12):3-8.
(
|
| [13] |
孔祥柏, 程年生. 丁、 潜坝局部水头损失的试验研究[J]. 水利水运科学研究, 1992(4): 387-395.
(
|
| [14] |
韩玉芳, 陈志昌. 丁坝回流长度的变化[J]. 水利水运工程学报, 2004(3):33-36.
(
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
岳建平. 港渠口门回流淤积概化模型试验和研究[J]. 泥沙研究, 1986, 11(2): 41-50.
(
|
| [19] |
谢鉴衡. 关于低水头水利枢纽的河势规划问题[J]. 水利水电技术, 1985, 16(7): 1-8, 62.
(
|
| [20] |
刘青泉. 盲肠河段口门掺混区的泥沙扩散[J]. 泥沙研究, 1995, 20(2): 11-21.
(
|
| [21] |
黄才安, 奚斌. 水流能耗率极值原理及其水力学实例研究[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2002, 19(5): 7-9.
(
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |