Different methods of considering the shear stresses between a main channel and its flood plains are discussed. The methods considered include the simplistic method of considering the entire hydraulic cross section as one, dividing the cross section into independent sections, assuming limited shear stresses between main channel and the flood plain, trying to find an interface with zero shear stress, or allowing for the shear stresses from a momentum balance. Based on evaluation of alternative steady‐state models, it is concluded that the area method is the most promising for computation of discharge and that the Prinos‐Townsend equation gives accurate results for apparent shear stresses at the main channel‐flood plain interface. The results of the theoretical study are used in an unsteady‐flow model, prepared based on hydrodynamic principles. The model facilitates the investigation of the significance of the momentum‐transfer phenomenon between the main channel and its floodplains. The analysis demonstrate...
[1]
Marion R. Carstens,et al.
Linear-Momentum Flux to Overbank Sections
,
1970
.
[2]
Chin-lien Yen,et al.
Shape Effects on Resistance in Flood-Plain Channels
,
1973
.
[3]
N. Rajaratnam,et al.
HYDRAULICS OF CHANNELS WITH FLOOD-PLAINS
,
1981
.
[4]
P. R. Wormleaton,et al.
Discharge Assessment in Compound Channel Flow
,
1982
.
[5]
D. Knight,et al.
Flood Plain and Main Channel Flow Interaction
,
1983
.
[6]
R. Townsend,et al.
Comparison of methods for predicting discharge in compound open channels
,
1984
.
[7]
D. Knight,et al.
Boundary Shear in Symmetrical Compound Channels
,
1984
.
[8]
W. R. Myers,et al.
Velocity and Discharge in Compound Channels
,
1987
.
[9]
P. R. Wormleaton,et al.
An improved method of calculation for steady uniform flow in prismatic main channel/flood plain sections
,
1990
.
[10]
W. R. C. Myers,et al.
Flow resistance in compound channels
,
1990
.