See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323918639

A REVIEW ON SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODELS OF TIDAL RIVERS

Conference Paper · March 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 181

2 authors:

Aysha Akter Linkon Bhattacharjee

Chittagong University of Engineering & Technology Southern Illinois University Carbondale
26 PUBLICATIONS   94 CITATIONS    5 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

2) Identification of hotspot of urban flood hazard View project

Green Roof Application View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Linkon Bhattacharjee on 21 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Paper ID:101
1st National Conference on Water Resources Engineering (NCWRE 2018)
21-22 March 2018, CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh
www.cuet.ac.bd

A REVIEW ON SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODELS OF TIDAL RIVERS

L. Bhattacharjee1* & A. Akter2

1
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology,
Chittagong-4349, <lkbcharya@gmail.com>
2
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology, Chittagong-4349,
<aysha_akter@cuet.ac.bd>

*Corresponding Author

ABSTRACT
Sediment transport in tidal rivers largely depends on settling velocity and river flow. However, heavy
sediment deposition poses threat to the aquatic lives as well as increases the floodplain of the rivers. On
the other hand, lower deposition reduces vegetative growth leading to the river bank erosion and land
loss. Although Karnafuli and Halda River play important economic role in Bangladesh, there are very
few field studies as well as numerical modelling covered the detail sediment transport in these rivers.
Thus, there is a knowledge gap for the decision makers to implement any integrated water resources
project in these rivers. Therefore, along with a periodic field survey an intensive numerical model study
could provide information on sediment transport. In this connection, an intensive review was conducted
on available sediment transport modelling literatures since 1977. Review outcomes showed 1D
numerical models performed better in predicting basic parameters of the channels with unsteady flow.
Then, since 1990s 2D models showed better performance over 1D by providing spatially varied
information about water depth and bed elevation within rivers. Coupled 1D2D model may perform
better in simulating sediment flow in one year period or higher but 3D model should be used to simulate
the flow around an obstacle for getting better output of the model. In this regard, Delft3D appeared
more convenient and reliable in generating reasonable output on sediment transport of tidal rivers.

Keywords: Tidal rivers; Sediment; Modelling; Karnafuli; Delft3D.

INTRODUCTION
The processes of water flow and sediment transport take place simultaneously in rivers, floodplains,
and coastal areas. In natural rivers the water flow generally influences sediment transport and thus
morphological evolution occurs (Qian et al., 2015, Simpson and Castelltort, 2006; Li and Duffy, 2011).
Tidal channels are highly dynamic morphological features of many estuaries. At the earlier stage, most
studies were based on in situ measurements or historical data (Ahnert, 1960) In recent years, with the
development of computer capacity, long-term morphodynamic models have been developed (Vriend,
2003) and increasingly employed for tidal channel research (Hibma et al., 2003; Guo et al., 2015). They
provide good insight to understand the tidal channel morphological evolution. The calculation of flow
and sediment transport is one of the most important tasks in river engineering. It is not easy because of
the many complex and interacting physical phenomena. 3D models were developed and tested over the
years those allowed both suspended and bed-load sediment transport and the associated bed
deformation for natural rivers (Papanicolaou et al., 2008). Rapid developments in numerical methods
for fluid mechanics, computational modeling has supported studying sediment transport and associated
morphological changes in different environments such as rivers, lakes, and coastal areas (Papanicolaou
et al., 2008). This study provides a better understanding about trends and applications with respect to
sediment transport models. Finally, this article is mainly focused on multidimensional computational
3D models. However, a brief overview of the 1D and 2D models is also included for providing a
rational comparison with the main features of the 3D models.
 Paper ID:101
1st National Conference on Water Resources Engineering (NCWRE 2018)
21-22 March 2018, CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh
www.cuet.ac.bd

APPROACHES
A wide range of models exists for use in simulating sediment transport. An intensive review were
carried out on the model types based on the published works during 1968 to 2017. These models differ
in terms of complexity, processes considered, and the data required for model calibration and model
application. The most appropriate model will depend on the intended use and the characteristics of the
catchment being considered. Data requirements of the model including the spatial and temporal
variation of model inputs and outputs are also important factors (Merritt et al., 2003). In general, models
fall into four categories. These are: empirical, conceptual, physics based and computational.

Empirical models
These are the simplest model, usually based on the analysis of observations and seek to characterize
response from input data. Empirical models are frequently used as they can be implemented with
limited data and parameter inputs, and are particularly useful as a first step in identifying sources of
sediment and nutrient generation (Merritt et al., 2003). In last 50 years, 19 numbers of empirical models
used for simulating sediment transport [Fig. 1].

Conceptual models
Conceptual models tend to include a general description of catchment processes, without including the
specific details of process interactions. This model does not require large amounts of spatially and
temporally distributed input data. Parameter values for conceptual models have typically been obtained
through calibration against observed data, for instance stream discharge and concentration
measurements (Abbott et al., 1986). The lack of uniqueness in parameter values for conceptual models
means that the parameters in such models have limited physical interpretability. Moreover, conceptual
models are prone to error of aggregation. Compare to other models these are relatively low in numbers
[Fig. 1].

Physics-based models
These are based on the solution of fundamental physical equations describing stream flow, sediment
and associated nutrient generation in a catchment. Standard equations used in such models are the
equations of momentum for flow and conservation of mass for both flow and sediment (Bennett, 1974).
Where parameters cannot be measured in the catchment they must be determined through calibration
against observed data. Each parameter has its own inaccuracy which may arise from measurement
errors (Beck, 1987). Remarkable number of physics based models were developed since 1980 [Fig.1].
However, physics-based models are error prone due to their large parameter requirements.

Computational Models
With the rapid growth in computer technology, numerical models have become popular tools for the
study of mobile bed hydraulics. Sediment transport computer models differ greatly in their
characteristics based on their basic concepts (Merritt et al., 2003). The computational models are
divided into many different categories based on their dimension, width and many other factors that have
been considered. Nowadays these are the most used and preferred model for simulation and modelling
[Fig.1]. Conceptual models are prone to error of aggregation.

35
Number of Models

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Conceptual Empirical Physical Computational
Models Models Models Models
Model Types
Fig. 1: Number of different types of models during 1968 to 2012
 Paper ID:101
1st National Conference on Water Resources Engineering (NCWRE 2018)
21-22 March 2018, CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh
www.cuet.ac.bd

One-dimensional models
1D flow model solves only the cross-sectional averaged velocity, flow rate or discharge at each model
cross-section. These models are simple to develop as well as use. Though model simplicity is gained by
spatial averaging without details. Moreover, model cannot efficiently represent small scale flow and
sediment processes. Therefore, 1D model is rather less responsive in predicting sediment transport and
channel form (Table 1).
Table 1: 1D model description
Model Name Application
IALLUVIAL Simulation of flow and sediment processes in the Missouri River (Karim
and Kennedy 1982)
FLUVIAL-11 Simulation of sediment-routing and associated river channel changes in
the San Dieguito River (Chang, 1984).
Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code Modelling the sediment transport in river with necessary data
– 1D (EFDC1D) (hydrologic, hydraulic, and sediment data (Hayter et al., 2001)
NETSTARS Simulation of bed load and suspended load separately under unsteady
flow (Lee and Hsieh, 2003)
Mobile BED (MOBED) Comparison of MOBED results with HEC-6 results for the flow and
sediment transport along with the bed-level change for the Saskatchewan
River below Gardiner Dam, Canada (Papanicolaou et al., 2008)

Two-dimensional models
For representing large-scale flow and sediment-transport processes 1D models are suitable. However,
to address the position and amplitude of bars within the channel reach generally a 2D model is
necessary, as a 1D model cannot predict the local flow and bar evolution. A 2D model should be applied
to predict the details of local sediment transport or changes in bed morphology (Table 2).

Table 2: Description and application of 2D models

Model Name Application
SEdiment and Investigation of the effects of sediment on the transport of
RAdionuclide TRAnsport (SERATRA) radionuclides in Cattaraugus and Buttermilk Creeks, New York
(Walters et al. 1982)
SUTRENCH-2D A mathematical model for predicting sedimentation (Van rijn et al.,
1985)
TABS-2 Simulation of the flow and sediment transport processes in the Black
Lake, Alaska (Papanicolaou et al. 2006)
Unsteady Sediment Transport models for Simulation of sand transport processes and associated bed-level
Alluvial Rivers Simulations (USTARS) changes of a reach in the Keelung River, Taiwan (Lee et al. 1997)
FLUVIAL 12 Simulation of flow and sediment processes of the San Dieguito River,
Southern California (Chang et al., 1996)
MIKE 21 Quantitative analysis of hydrodynamic characteristics and suspended
sediment transport in southern Yellow Sea (Xing et al., 2012)
Delft 2D Simulation of the morphological processes responsible for the
formation and evolution of the tidal channel system in the Hangzhou
Bay (Xie et al., 2009)

Three-dimensional models
3D models for flow, sediment transport and bed evolution have become relatively common over the last
decade. In many hydraulic engineering applications, one has to employ 3D models when 2D models are
not suitable for describing certain sediment transport processes (Merritt et al., 2003, Papanicolaou et al.,
2008). 2D models do not adequately represent the physics of flows which is possible in 3D models.
With the latest developments in computing resources such as computational speed, parallel computing,
and data storage classification 3D sediment transport models have become much more attractive to use
(Table 3 and Table 4).
 Paper ID:101
1st National Conference on Water Resources Engineering (NCWRE 2018)
21-22 March 2018, CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh
www.cuet.ac.bd

Table 3: Summary of selected 3D models

Model and Last Update Flow Equation Used Cohesive Source code Language
references Sediment
TELEMAC v7p1r0 Unsteady Navier-Stokes Yes Public Fortran90
January
2016
FLOW-3D v11.2, Unsteady Meyer-Peter Muller No Proprietary Fortran90
Nov 2016
MIKE 3 2017 Unsteady Navier-Stokes Yes Proprietary Fortran90
Delft3D-FLOW V4 2016 Unsteady Navier-Stokes Yes Public Fortran90
SSIIM 2 v.186, May Steady Navier-Stokes and No Public C++
2016 convection-diffusion
Computational Unsteady Advection-diffusion Yes copyrighted Fortan90
Hydraulics
-
3D-SEDiment
(CH3DSED3D)
SHETRAN V4 2016 Unsteady Physics-based partial Yes Proprietary Fortran77
differential equations
Environmental Version Unsteady Advective-diffusion Yes Public Fortran77
Fluid Dynamics 1.01, 2007
code (EFDC3D)

Table 4: Application of 3D models

Model Name Application
MIKE 3 Simulation of the flow, sediment transport processes, and water quality of Upper Klamath
Lake, Oregon (Jacobsen and Rasmussen, 1997)
CH3D-SED Simulation of hydrodynamics and sediment transport at several reaches of the Mississippi
River (Gessler et al., 1999)
SHETRAN Establishing relation between sediment yield and basin area (Birkinshaw and Bathurst, 2006)
Delft3D-FLOW Simulated the morphological changes in Yangtze Estuary, China. (Logan et al., 2010)
TELEMAC Simulation of sediment transport and bed morphology around Gangjeong Weir on Nakdong
River in Korea. (Nguyen et al., 2014)
EFDC3D Simulation of suspended sediment transport at Yuan-Yang lake in Taiwan. (Liu et al., 2016)

Model selection criteria

The competency of a model usually based on how the model will be used? Required details i.e. the
count and type of inputs and outputs of the model and their spatial and temporal variability, and model
validity. Generally model selection should be carefully carried out:
(a) Model assumptions should be carefully reviewed, especially of the empirical practices.
(b) The circumstances in which the model is presented, i.e., the topography, geography and
geomorphological. For example, if a model was prepared for a monsoon weather condition, the
caution should be applicable for dry weather condition. Similarly the basin or watershed sizes
also need to be considered during model selection.
(c) Awareness needs for model input data requirements while dealing with limited data bank.

Moreover, the model must be selected based on the evaluation, feasibility, cost, and time.

Studies in Bangladesh
Several hydrodynamic and morphological assessments have been carried out on some major
rivers in Bangladesh viz. Padma, Karnafuli and Jamuna (Table 5). The main determinant of an
appropriate model for exploring aspects of sediment movement through river basins is what the model
user is attempting to address. This will identify the required explicit representation in the model as well
as the spatial and temporal resolution at which a model needs to be applied. Determining the appropriate
model for an application requires consideration of the suitability of the model to local catchment
conditions, data requirements, model complexity, the accuracy, validity, assumptions, components and
the objectives of the model user.
 Paper ID:101
1st National Conference on Water Resources Engineering (NCWRE 2018)
21-22 March 2018, CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh
www.cuet.ac.bd

Table 5: Morphological studies in Bangladesh using different models

Source Study Model used Approach Findings
area
Laz Jamuna Delft 3D Observation of water level data from Simulation of sediment
(2012) River 2010-2011, cross sectional variation from transport rate and variation of
2010-2012. bed level was carried out.
Alam Karnafuli Delft3D 2D Water level data for November (post Assessed the erosion and
(2013) River model- flow monsoon) and June (monsoon) were deposition pattern due to
module collected.Velocity measured for January dredging activities.
and August.
Chisty et al. Karnafuli Remote Twelve years interval data of Landsat TM Prediction of shifting pattern
(2014) River sensing and and ETM+ Satellite of Karnafuli river.
GIS image of 1989, 2001 and 2013.
Chowdhury Karnafuli HEC-RAS Time series discharge and water level Analysis of sedimentation rate
and Navera River 4.1.0 data, bathymetry data were collected. in the river.
(2015)
Roy and Padma Delft3D Bathymetry data for 2010, upstream Hydrodynamic and
Saha river discharge and water level data for morphological behavior of the
(2016) 2010-2011, and Updated sediment data Padma River.
were collected.

CONCLUSIONS
All numerical model considered predicting the similar hydrodynamic conditions. To understand the
morphological behavior and sediment transport of rivers in Bangladesh several models have been used.
Among the discussed models so far the Delft3D is the most convenient and powerful tool for
understanding and predicting sediment flow in rivers and coastal areas with reasonable output.
However, for model section should be made as per the general criteria described earlier.

ACKOWLEDGEMENTS
The paper is a part of an ongoing research project ‘Modeling of Sediment Transport in Karnafuli-
Halda River (MSTKR) (CUET/DRE/2017-18/CE/021)’ supported by funds from the Dept. of Civil
Engineering, Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology (CUET), Bangladesh.

REFERENCES
Abbott, MB, Bathurst, JC, Cunge, JA, O’Connell, PE, and Rasmussen, J. 1986. An introduction to the
European Hydrological System - Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, “SHE”, 1: History and philosophy
of a physically-based, distributed modelling system. Journal of Hydrology, 87(1–2), 45–59.
Ahnert, F. 1960. Estuarine meanders in the Chesapeak Bay area. Geographical Review, 50(3), 390–
391.
Alam, S. 2013. Application of 2D Morphological Model to Assess the Response of Karnafuli River due
to Capital Dredging. Journal of Water Resources and Ocean Science, 2(3), 40.
Beck, MB. 1987. Water quality modeling: A review of the analysis of uncertainty. Water Resources
Research, 23(8), 1393–1442.
Bennett, JP. 1974. Concepts of mathematical modelling of sediment yield. Water Resources Research,
10(3), 485–492.
Blumberg, AF and Mellor, GL. 1987. A description of a threedimensional coastal ocean circulation
model. Three-dimensional coastal ocean models, N. Heaps, ed., Coastal and Estuarine Sciences,
American Geophysics Union, Vol. 4, 1–16.
Birkinshaw, SJ and Bathurst, JC. 2006. Model study of the relationship between sediment yield and
river basin area. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 31(6), 750–761.
Chang, BHH; Harrison, LL, and Lee, W. 1996. Numerical modeling for sediment-pass-through
reservoirs. J. Hydraul. Eng., 122(7), 381–388.
Chang, HH. 1984. Modeling of River Channel Changes. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 110(2),
157–172.
 Paper ID:101
1st National Conference on Water Resources Engineering (NCWRE 2018)
21-22 March 2018, CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh
www.cuet.ac.bd

Chisty, KU; Islam, A and Misuk, S. 2014. Analysis of river bank erosion and deposition of karnafuli
river in Chittagong , Bangladesh using remote sensing and gis approach, 2nd International Conference
on Advances in Civil Engineering. ID : WRE 039, 26 –28 Dec, 2014 CUET, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Chowdhury, HA and Navera, UK. 2015. A Study on Sedimentation Process of Chittagong Port through
Karnafuli River by Using Mathematical Model. International Conference on Recent Innovation in Civil
Engineering for Sustainable Development (IICSD-2015), Paper ID: WRE-004, Department of Civil
Engineering , DUET - Gazipur, Bangladesh
Gessler, D; Hall, B; Spasojevic, M; Holly, FM; Pourtaheri, H and Raphelt, NX. 1999. Application of
3D mobile bed, hydrodynamics model. J. Hydraul. Eng., 125(7), 737–749.
Guo, L; Wegen VDM; Roelvink, DJA; Wang, ZB, and He, Q. 2015. Long-term, process-based
morphodynamic modeling of a fluvio-deltaic system, part I: The role of river discharge. Continental
Shelf Research, 109, 95–111.
Hayter, EJ; Hamrick, JM; Bicknell, BR and Gray, MH. 2001. One-Dimensional Hydrodynamic/
Sediment Transport Model for Stream Networks. Environmental Protection, EPA/600/R-01/072.
Hibma, A; De Vriend, HJD and Stive, MJF. 2003. Numerical modelling of shoal pattern formation in
well-mixed elongated estuaries. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 57(5–6), 981–991.
Jacobsen, F and Rasmussen, EB. 1997. MIKE 3 MT: A 3-dimensional mud transport model. Technical
Rep. DG-12 to the Commission of the European Communities.
Laz, OU. 2012. Morphological Assessment of a Selected Reach of Jamuna River By Using Delft3D
Model. MSc Thesis, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.
Li, S and Duffy, CJ. 2011. Fully coupled approach to modeling shallow water flow, sediment transport,
and bed evolution in rivers. Water Resources Research, 47(3), 1–20.
Liu, WC; Chan, WT and Tsai, DDW. 2016. Three-dimensional modeling of suspended sediment
transport in a subalpine lake. Environmental Earth Sciences, 75(2), 1–13.
Lee, HY and Hsieh, HM. 2003. Numerical simulations of scour and deposition in a channel network.
International Journal of Sediment Research, 18(1), 32–49.
Logan, B; Nelson, J; McDonald, R and Wright, S. 2010. Mechanics and modeling of flow, sediment
transport and morphologic change in riverine lateral separation zones. 2nd Joint Federal Interagency
Conference, i(November 2004), 2255.
Merritt, WS; Letcher, RA and Jakeman, AJ. 2003. A review of erosion and sediment transport models.
Environmental Modelling and Software, 18(8–9), 761–799.
Nguyen, VT; Moreno, CS and Lyu, S. 2014. Numerical simulation of sediment transport and
bedmorphology around Gangjeong Weir on Nakdong River. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 19(7),
2291–2297.
Papanicolaou, AN; Elhakeem M; Prakash S; Edinger J and George K. 2018. Sediment Transport
Modeling Review—Current and Future Developments. Journal of hydraulic engineering, 134:1-14.
Qian, H; Cao, Z; Pender, G; Liu, H, and Hu, P. (2015). Well-balanced numerical modelling of
non-uniform sediment transport in alluvial rivers. International Journal of Sediment Research, 30(2),
117–130.
Simpson, G and Castelltort, S. 2006. Coupled model of surface water flow, sediment transport and
morphological evolution. Computers and Geosciences, 32(10), 1600–1614.
Vriend, HJD. 2003. Advances in Morphodynamics of Tidal Rivers and Estuaries. International
Conference on Estuaries and Coasts, November 9-11, Hangzhou, China Estuaries, 3–10.
Walters, WH; Ecker, RM; and Onishi, Y. 1982. Sediment and radionuclide transport in rivers. Phase 2:
Field sampling program for Cattaraugus and Buttermilk Creeks, New York. Technical Rep.
No.PNL-3117, Vol. 2, Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, Wash.
Roy, B; Haider MR and Yunus A. 2016. A Study on Hydrodynamic and Morphological Behavior of
Padma River Using Delft3D, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Civil Engineering for
Sustainable Development (ICCESD 2016), KUET, Khulna, Bangladesh (ISBN: 978-984-34-0265-3)
(February), 978–984.

View publication stats