Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, 78:617 | Cite as

Research on soil detachment rate and hydrodynamic parameters of dip/anti-dip slope in simulated karst trough valley

  • Fengling Gan
  • Binghui HeEmail author
  • Ziyang Qin
Original Article
  • 59 Downloads

Abstract

Bedding dip has an important influence on soil detachment and flow hydrodynamics in a karst trough valley. The laboratory rainfall simulation was conducted with three bedding dips (bare slope, dip slope and anti-dip slope) under three rainfall intensities (30, 60, 90 mm h−1). The characteristics of soil detachment and hydrodynamic parameters were assessed, including water flow shear stress, stream power, unit stream power and unit flow energy. The significant effects of bedding dips and rainfall intensities and their interactions on soil detachment and hydrodynamic parameters were examined. The results showed that (1) the soil detachment rate decreased with increasing rainfall duration, and the soil detachment rate in 30° bedding dip of dip slope was much larger than those in bare slope and anti-dip slope in most rainfall intensities; (2) the 60° bedding dip of dip slope was the threshold that controlled the stream power, unit stream power and unit flow energy increased or decreased under different rainfall intensities; and (3) the soil detachment rate had extremely significant positive power relationships with water flow shear stress, stream power, unit stream power and unit flow energy. Meanwhile, the stream power was the most suitable parameter for predicting soil detachment in a karst trough valley slope. Therefore, these results could provide useful information for soil erosion prediction in a karst trough valley.

Keywords

Hydrodynamic parameters Bedding dip Karst trough valley Soil detachment rate Dip/anti-dip slopes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the National Key Research and Developmental Program of China (2016YFC0502303) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (41771312). Special thanks are given to the named Zhanpeng Chen, Jiangmin Zeng, Rongchang Zeng, Shi Fu, Yingni Du and Yaopeng Wu for their assistance during the part of laboratory work.

References

  1. Abrahams AD, Li G, Krishnan C, Atkinson JF (2001) A sediment transport equation for interrill overland flow on rough surfaces. Earth Surf Process Landf 26(13):1443–1459Google Scholar
  2. Ali M, Sterk G, Seeger M, Boersema M, Peters P (2011) Effect of hydraulic parameters on sediment transport capacity in overland flow over erodible beds. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 16(2):591–601Google Scholar
  3. An J, Zheng F, Lu J, Li GF (2012) Investigating the role of raindrop impact on hydrody-namic mechanism of soil erosion under simulated rainfall conditions. Soil Sci 177(8):517–526Google Scholar
  4. Auzet AV, Boiffin J, Ludwig B (1995) Concentrated flow erosion in cultivated catchments: influence of soil surface state. Earth Surf Process Landf 20(8):759–767Google Scholar
  5. Bagnold RA (1966) An approach to the sediment transport problem from general physics. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 422-I. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. Bunte K, Poesen J (1994) Effects of rock fragment size and cover on overland flow hydraulics, local turbulence and sediment yield on an erodible soil surface. Earth Surf Process Landf 19(2):115–135Google Scholar
  7. Chen F, Zhou DQ, Bai XY, Xiao JY, Qian QH (2018) Spatial-temporal evolution of karst rock desertification and future trends based on CA-markov methods in typical karst region. J Agric Resour Environ 35(2):174–180Google Scholar
  8. Dai QH, Liu Z, Shao H, Yang Z (2015) Karst bare slope soil erosion and soil quality: a simulation case study. Soil Earth 6:985–995Google Scholar
  9. Dai QH, Peng XD, Yang Z, Zhao LS (2017) Runoff and erosion processes on bare slopes in the karst rocky desertification area. CATENA 152:218–226Google Scholar
  10. Elliot WJ, Laflen JM (1993) A process-based rill erosion model. Trans ASAE 36(1):65–72Google Scholar
  11. Everaert W (1991) Empirical relations for the sediment transport capacity of interrill flow. Earth Surf Process Landf 16(6):513–532Google Scholar
  12. Fábio CN, Romain D, Fritz S, Naki A, Kubik W (2015) Bedrock bedding, landsliding and erosional budgets in the Central European Alps. Terra Nova 27(5):370–378Google Scholar
  13. Fan G, Zhang JJ, Wu JB, Yan KM (2016) Dynamic response and dynamic failure mode of a weak intercalated rock slope using a shaking table. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49(8):3243–3256Google Scholar
  14. Fayou A, Dong SM, Fan YH (2014) Study on the stability influence factors of bedding slope under the action of seismic load. Appl Mech Mater 501–504:1560–1565Google Scholar
  15. Giménez R, Govers G (2002) Flow detachment by concentrated flow on smooth and irregular beds. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66(5):1475–1483Google Scholar
  16. Govers G (1990) Empirical relationships on the transporting capacity of overland flow. Transp Depos Process IAHS 189:45–63Google Scholar
  17. Govers G (1992) Evaluation of transporting capacity formulae for overland flow. In: Parsons AJ, Abrahams AD (eds) Overland flow hydraulics and erosion mechanics. University College London Press, London, pp 243–273Google Scholar
  18. Hai X, Gang L, Puling L, Fenli Z, Jiaqiong Z, Feinan H (2017) Response of soil detachment rate to the hydraulic parameters of concentrated flow on steep loessial slopes on the Loess Plateau of China. Hydrol Process 31(14):2613–2621Google Scholar
  19. Jomaa S, Barry DA, Heng BCP, Brovelli A, Sander GC, Parlange JY (2012) Influence of rock fragment coverage on soil erosion and hydrological response: laboratory flume experiments and modeling. Water Resour Res 48:21Google Scholar
  20. Kheir RB, Abdallah C, Khawlie M (2008) Assessing soil erosion in Mediterranean karst landscapes of Lebanon using remote sensing and GIS. Eng Geol 99(3):239–254Google Scholar
  21. Kiernan K (2010) Environmental degradation in karst areas of Cambodia: a legacy of war? Land Degrad Dev 21(6):503–519Google Scholar
  22. Knapen A, Poesen J, Govers G, Gyssels G, Nachtergaele J (2007) Resistance of soils to concentrated flow erosion: a review. Earth Sci Rev 80(1):75–109Google Scholar
  23. Li G, Abrahams AD, Atkinson JF (1996) Correction factors in the determination of mean velocity of overland flow. Earth Surf Process Landf 21(6):509–515Google Scholar
  24. Li TY, He BH, Lei TW, Chen ZP, Zhang Y (2017) Comparison of hydrodynamic parameters for predicting soil and water loss on simulation landslide deposit slope in Wenchuan earthquake area, China. Environ Earth Sci 76(4):1–10Google Scholar
  25. Liu JE, Wang ZL, Gao SJ, Zhang KD (2012) Experimental study on hydro-dynamic mechanism of sheet erosion processes on loess hillslope. Trans CSAE 28(7):144–149 (In Chinese with English abstract) Google Scholar
  26. Lowe D, Waltham T (1995) A dictionary of karst and caves: a brief guide to the terminology and concepts of caves and karst science. Cave studies series number 6. British Cave Research Association, London, p 41Google Scholar
  27. Luk SH, Merz W (1992) Use of the salt tracing technique to determine the velocity of overland flow. Soil Technol 5(4):289–301Google Scholar
  28. Lyle WM, Smerdon ET (1965) Relation of compaction and other soil properties to erosion resistance of soils. Trans ASAE 8(3):419–422Google Scholar
  29. Moore ID, Burch GJ (1986) Sediment transport capacity of sheet and rill flow: application of unit stream power theory. Water Resour Res 22:1350–1360Google Scholar
  30. Nearing MA, Foster GR, Lane LJ, Finkner SC (1989) A process-based soil erosion model for USDA-water prediction project technology. Trans ASAE 32(5):1587–1593Google Scholar
  31. Nearing MA, Norton LD, Bulgakov DA, Larionov GA, West LT, Dontsova KM (1997) Hydraulics and erosion in eroding rills. Water Resour Res 33(4):865–876Google Scholar
  32. Nearing MA, Simanton JR, Norton LD, Bulygin SJ, Stone J (1999) Soil erosion by surface water flow on a stony, semiarid hillslope. Earth Surf Process Landf 24(8):677–686Google Scholar
  33. Korup O, Schlunegger F (2009) Rock-type control on erosion-induced uplift, eastern Swiss Alps. Earth Planet Sci Lett 278(3–4):278–285Google Scholar
  34. Peng XD, Dai QH, Yang Z, Zhao LS (2016) Sediment yield of surface and underground erosion in the process of rocky desertification of karst area. Acta Pedol Sin 53(5):1237–1248Google Scholar
  35. Rieke-Zapp D, Poesen J, Nearing MA (2007) Effects of rock fragments incorporated in the soil matrix on concentrated flow hydraulics and erosion. Earth Surf Process Landf 32(7):1063–1076Google Scholar
  36. Schwab M, Schlunegger F, Schneider H, StÖckli G, Rieke-Zapp D (2009) Contrasting sediment flux in Val Lumnezia (GraubÜnden, Eastern Swiss Alps), and implications for landsape development. Swiss J Geosci 102(2):211–222Google Scholar
  37. Wang XY, Li ZX, Cai CF, Shi ZH, Xu QX, Fu ZY, Guo ZL (2012) Effects of rock fragments cover on hydrological response and soil loss from Regosols in a semi-humid environment in south–West China. Geomorphology 151–152:234–242Google Scholar
  38. Wang JX, Zou BP, Liu Y, Tang YQ, Zhang XB, Yang P (2014) Erosion-creep-collapse mechanism of underground soil loss for the karst rocky desertification in Chenqi village, Puding county, Guizhou, China. Environ Earth Sci 72(8):2751–2764Google Scholar
  39. Wang RX, He BH, Li TY, Chen ZP, Zhang JS (2016) Research on soil erosion rate and hydrodynamic parameters of landslide accumulation slope in Wenchuan earthquake area. Acta Pedol Sin 53(2):99–110 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  40. Wei XP, Yan Y, Xie DT, Ni JP, Loáiciga HA (2016) The soil leakage ratio in the Mudu watershed, China. Environ Earth Sci 75(8):1–11Google Scholar
  41. Wu B, Wang ZL, Zhang QW, Shen N, Liu J, Wang S (2018) Evaluation of shear stress and unit stream power to determine the sediment transport capacity of loess materials on different slopes. J Soils Sedim 18:116–127Google Scholar
  42. Yang CT, Song CCS (1979) Theory of minimum rate of energy dissipation. J Hydraul Div 105(7):769–784Google Scholar
  43. Zhang KL, Tang KL (2000) A study on hydraulic characteristics of flow for prediction of rill detachment capacity on loess slope. Acta Pedol Sin 37(1):9–15 (In Chinese) Google Scholar
  44. Zhang GH, Liu BY, Liu GB, He XW, Nearing MA (2003) Detachment of undisturbed soil by shallow flow. Soil Sci Soc Am J 67(3):713–719Google Scholar
  45. Zhang XB, Jiao JY, He YB, Zhang YQ, Long Y (2007) Soil loss tolerance and reasonable soil loss. Sci Soil Water Conserv 5:114–116Google Scholar
  46. Zhang GH, Liu YM, Han YF, Zhang XH (2009) Sediment transport and soil detachment on steep slopes: I. Transport capacity estimation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73(4):1291–1297Google Scholar
  47. Zhang LT, Gao ZL, Tian HW (2013) Hydrodynamic process of soil erosion in steep slope of engineering accumulation. J CSAE 29(24):94–102Google Scholar
  48. Zhang LT, Gao ZL, Yang SW, Li YH, Tian HW (2015) Dynamic processes of soil erosion by runoff on engineered landforms derived from expressway construction: a case study of typical steep spoil heap. CATENA 128:108–121Google Scholar
  49. Zhou J, Tang YQ, Yang P, Zhang XH (2012) Inference of creep mechanism in underground soil loss of karst conduitsI. Conceptual model. Nat Hazards 62(3):1191–1215Google Scholar
  50. Zobeck TM, Onstad CA (1987) Tillage and rainfall effects on random roughness: a review. Soil Tillage Res 9:1–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Resources and Environment/Key Laboratory of Eco-environment in Three Gorges Region, Ministry of EducationSouthwest UniversityChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations