796

2014,26(5):796-806
DOI: 10.1016/S1001-6058(14)60088-3

Experimental and numerical study on hydrodynamics of riparian vegetation*

UOTANI Takuya
Kobe City Bureau, Kobe, Japan, E-mail: takuya_uotani@office.city.kobe.lg.jp
KANDA Keiichi
Department of Civil Engineering, Akashi National College of Technology, Akashi, Japan
MICHIOKU Kohji
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hosei University, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan

(Received March 25, 2014, Revised May 5, 2014)

Abstract: Recently, many channelized rivers tend to be heavily vegetated due to regime shifts in hydrological, fluvial and ecological
processes. Dense vegetation in a river frequently obstructs a flood flow and reduces conveyance capacity of channels. On the other
hand, river vegetation provides various ecological services such as habitats for various species and life, natural cycle of organic and
inorganic substances, etc.. It is of engineering importance to understand vegetation hydrodynamics in order to preserve vegetation
nature and keep a certain level of flow conveyance capacity. In view that willows tend to be densely vegetated along the shoreline of
floodplains or sandbars, a field measurement, a physical model experiment and a numerical analysis were carried out for
investigating hydrodynamics in an open channel with riparian vegetation. Discussion was made focusing on flow and shear layer
structures developed around the vegetation canopy.

Key words: open channel, riparian vegetation, drag force, velocity profile, laboratory experiment, hydrodynamic model

Introduction dynamics and flood control. They reduce flow, regula-

Vegetation on flood plains is a world-wide engi-
neering issue in most channelized rivers, which brings
forth not only degradation of flow conveyance capaci-
ty but also irreversible changes in the ecological sys-
tem of rivers. In the old days before the modern ages,
the natural vegetation such as bamboo and pine trees
was nation-widely used as construction materials for
riparian works. Considering that the river restoration
paradigm is now shifting toward a direction of near-
nature river work, a proper management and wise use
of vegetation would provide us a new strategy of sus-
tainable flood protection. Our field measurement in a
densely vegetated river reach suggests that most of
willows tend to be vegetated along shorelines of main
channel. Trees vegetated in rivers have two distinctly
opposite functions from viewpoints of river morpho-
* Biography: UOTANI Takuya (1990-), Male, Master,
Engineer
Corresponding author: MICHIOKU Kohji,
E-mail: kohji.michioku.47@hosei.ac.jp
te streamlines and protect shoreline against erosion.
On the other hand, the decelerated stream on the ve-
getated floodplain eventually promotes sedimentation
and leads to overgrowth of vegetation. In this study,
hydrodynamics of riparian vegetation was experimen-
tally and theoretically investigated and their potential
performance as a natural structure for protecting the
main channels revetment is discussed.
Due to differences in water depth and bed rou-
ghness, a spanwise shear layer and an organized vor-
tex street are generated along the boundary between
the floodplain and the main channel. The bank vegeta-
tion must play a role as an additional driving force to
furthermore intensify the shear-dominant flow structu-
re. Zong and Nepf[1,2] and Rominger and Nepf[3] in-
vestigated a streamwise development and turbulent
dynamics of the shear layer in emergent canopies of
finite width. White and Nepf[4] proposed a formula gi-
ving the shear layer thickness as a function of vegeta-
tion parameters such as the frontal area, the drag coe-
fficient and width of vegetation. The key issue in flow
modelling of the vegetated channels is how to proper-
ly evaluate a roughness or a drag flow coefficient of
 797

vegetation. Researches such as Nikora and Nikora[5] a field measurement was carried out focusing on the
contributed to finding a functional dependency of the riparian vegetation. The study site is a reach in the
drag flow coefficient on vegetation density and stem Kako River between 23.15 km-24.3 km distances
diameter. from the river mouth. The Kako River is a first class
Besides the experimental studies, various hydrau- river stretching in the southern region in Hyogo Prefe-
lic models were proposed to describe velocity profile cture, Japan. Its total length and catchment area are
and to evaluate flow conveyance in vegetated channe- 96 km and 1 730 km2, respectively. The locations of
ls[6-8]. They are 1-D or quasi-2-D models focusing on stream and rain gauging stations and the field study
the spanwise shear-layer structure, which provides a site are shown in Fig.1.
solution of the depth-averaged velocity profile. Al-
though understanding of the vegetation hydrodynami-
cs has extensively been promoted by these studies,
discussion was limited within the case of emergent
canopies. The vegetation tends to be submerged when
the water level is high or the vegetation is small. In
this regime of flow and vegetation, a significant shear
layer is additionally generated at the top of the vegeta-
tion canopy, which is another mechanism in reducing
flow conveyance capacity. Considering the turbulent
characteristics of the vertical shear layer, field survey,
laboratory experiments and flow modeling were ex-
tensively performed regarding to this issue[9-11]. Flow
models were furthermore developed to a 3-D analysis
by using the RANS and LES[12,13]. Flow configura-
tions in most of the studies, however, are still limited
to rather simple morphological and vegetational conf-
igurations such as laboratory test flumes. In order to Fig.1 Kako River system with the field site and major gauging
perform a flood flow analysis in prototype vegetated stations
channels with the minimum computer resources, a
quasi 3-D or a layer-averaged 2-D models is required.
The authors have developed a 2-D two-layer model,
mentioned as 2D2L model hereafter, which could
simulate flows not only through but also around the
vegetation. The water was vertically separated into
two layers above and through the vegetation by an in-
terface horizontally encompassing through the vegeta-
tion canopy top. The vegetation drag was considered
by using a conventional formula used in many studies.
The model was successfully applied to several flood Fig.2 Distribution of vegetation in test reach. A milestone of
events occurring in a vegetated river reach and a good 23.6 km distance from the river mouth is denoted in a
agreement of time-dependent velocity profiles was white square. A water level gauge and an H-ADCP tran-
obtained between the analysis and the field data[14,15]. sducer were equipped in the span-wise cross section
In this study, a laboratory experiment was carried shown in a black line
out in an open channel with a compound cross section
and riparian vegetation. Discharge was varied in a 1.2 Summary of field survey
wide range from the emerged vegetation to submerged A plane view of the study area is shown in Fig.2.
vegetation. The velocity was measured by a micro- In the last few decades, the river landscape has been
propeller velocimeter and a PIV technique. Both the tremendously changed from sand bars mostly covered
one-dimensional single layer model (1D1L model) by sand and gravel into green floodplains densely ve-
and the 2D2L model were applied in order to discuss getated with willows. Twenty two times field surveys
the riparian vegetation dynamics. were carried out focusing on the right bank floodplain
from April 2009 to January 2012. Locations of trees
and the morphological profile of vegetated areas were
1. Field survey of vegetation measured by using a handy GPS. Distribution of grou-
nd covers is categorized by colors in the figure. The
1.1 Study site predominant vegetation species are willow and bam-
In order to learn a structure of willow vegetation, boo. Bed materials were also sampled to estimate
798
Mannings roughness coefficient and to examine sedi-
mentation in the vegetated areas.
For the purpose of controlling vegetation growth
by promoting inundation on the floodplain, the flood-
plain encircled by a red broken line in Fig.2 was ex-
cavated by 0.5 m-1.5 m in 2008. In the excavation
project, it was also targeted to lead a flood flow to a
direction of the downstream-side vegetated area to de-
struct the overgrown willows. A horizontally scanning
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler H-ADCP was
equipped at the cross section of 23.6 km, and collected
a two-dimensional velocity profile every ten minutes
during flood events.
Fig.3 Distribution of stem diameter at breast height which is
categorized every 0.05 m by grey patterns
Fig.4 Distribution of tree height which is categorized every
1.0 m by grey patterns
1.3 Distribution of vegetation and their properties
The investigated items are species, stem diameter,
height, location and destructed situation of willows.
Observed stem diameters are plotted in Fig.3. One can
recognize that most mature trees with thick stem are
concentrated close to the embankment as well as in
the central areas of floodplain. Both of them are far
from the shoreline. On the other hand, thinner or you-
nger trees are mostly inhabited just in front of the
shore of the main channel. The same tendency is ob-
served in Fig.4 where data points show tree height.
Bear in mind that all the trees on the area excavated in
2008 encircled by a broken red line are younger than
four years.
The field data suggest that willows began to
grow mostly along the shoreline and grew up with
years. If willows experience little severe floods, they
continue to grow up and sediments are frequently tra-
pped and settled around the willows after every small
flood event. This is how sand bars developed in front
of the riparian willows and willows tend to be less fre-
quently damaged. This may be the mechanism of wi-
llows overgrowth. It is supposed that the mature wi-
llows have grown up in the areas far from the shore-
line in this manner. Aerial photos of river morphology
pictured in the last fifty years indicate that several na-
rrow belts of mature willows arranged on the flood-
plain are estimated to be ruins of shorelines. A new
shoreline will possibly be produced in front of the pre-
sent shoreline by sedimentation after years. The key
issue for a proper management of vegetated rivers is
to investigate hydrodynamics of the riparian vegeta-
tion.
2. Modelling of hydrodynamics in the vegetated
channel
Hydraulic modeling is carried out to examine
how vegetation properties such as stem diameter, den-
sity and spacing of trees, etc., affect shear flow stru-
cture in an open channel with riparian vegetation.
Two types of hydrodynamic models are applied in this
study. The first one is a uniform flow model with the
depth-averaged single flow layer, which is mentioned
as 1D1L model hereafter. The 1D1L model has
been applied to this test reach in order to evaluate a
historical change of flow fields with river morphologi-
cal change and vegetation growing. The second one is
a 2-D two-layer model (already mentioned as 2D2L
model above) that was originally developed by the
authors and successfully applied for flood routing of
the vegetated reach[14,15].
2.1 One-dimensional single-layer model (1D1L
model): Fig.5(a)
Concept of the model is based on a uniform flow
model developed by Rameshwaran and Shiono[7] that
was applied to a flow in a trapezoidal open channel
with vegetation. By rewriting the flow drag force in
terms of Mannings roughness coefficient instead of
Darcy-Weisbachs friction coefficient, the momentum
equation was rewritten as
2
g n 2 us 1
U g S0 H  U +1 +
H 1/ 3 p s2
Gravity Wall friction
1/ 2
w g n2 us w us
U DH H 2 1/ 3 =
wy H p w y p
Depth averaged Reynolds stress
 799

U CD Oveg
us2 H
2 (1)
Drag force in trees F

where U is the water density, g is the gravity ac-

celeration, y is a horizontal coordinate from the left
to right bank, S0 is bed slope, H is the water depth,
n is the Mannings roughness coefficient, and 1/ s is
the local bank slope. The vegetation is treated as a
porous body with the porosity p . The flow field in
the vegetation is described in terms of the apparent ve-
locity us , where the corresponding fluid velocity is
written as u = us / p . The depth averaged shear stress
is expressed by using a so-called zeroth-order turbu-
lence closure assumption in which an eddy viscosity is
described by the product of dimensionless eddy visco-
sity DH ( DH = 0.3) , water depth H and friction ve-
locity W b / U . According to the popularly used for-
mula, the drag force coefficient CD depends on ve-
getation parameters such as roughness vegetation den-
sity Oveg , stem diameter D , height hv and spacing
'S of the trees. Oveg is parameterized by the frontal
Fig.5 Configuration of hydrodynamic models for a vegetated
area per unit volume as compound open channel

DH D top of the canopy. Mass and momentum conservations

Oveg = = (2)
'S H 'S 2
2
are formulated in layer-averaged forms. The system is
two-layered not only in the vegetated area (Domain-A
Approximating a cross section profile by a poly- in Fig.5(b)) but also in the non-vegetated area (Do-
gon consisting of horizontal bed and sloping bank, it main-B in Fig.5(b)) so that the interfacial shear layer
is divided into subsections as schematically shown in developing around the outer edge of the vegetation
Fig.5(a). Equation (1) is numerically integrated in could be described. The two-layer interface in the pre-
each subsection for a given water depth H . The inte- sent system is defined as shown in a broken line in
gral constants are determined by equating the solutio- Fig.5(b). The details about the model could be refe-
ns of velocity and velocity gradient at each subse- rred to the authors previous study[14]. Here, only the
ctions border. In this manner a solution of stream- momentum equation for the vegetation layer is shown
wise velocity profile is obtained. The total discharge as below.
Q is computed by integrating the velocity solution in
the horizontal direction. 1 w M S 1 w M S 1 w M S
Note that applicability of the 1D1L model is li- + uS N + 2 vS N =
p wt N S p 2 wx S p w y S
mited to the emerged vegetation, since the flow has
just a single layer with depth-averaged velocity. In
order to analyze flow fields with submerged vegeta- w
tion by this model, an equivalent bed roughness para- wx 1 w uSc hV
2

meter is required. Even so, velocity solution is absent  g hV zS + 2 +

w p wx vSc uSc hV
for the flow in the vegetation canopy. wy

2.2 Two-dimensional two-layer model (2D2L model): Gravity Horizontal shear stress
Fig.5(b)
The 2D2L model was developed in order to de- x
1 w uSc vSc hV 1 G mB1 W b
scribe both the slow flow through the vegetation cano-  
py and the fast flow outside of the canopy. A two p 2 w y  vSc2 hV p 2 U W by
layer interface is arranged so that it encompasses the Horizontal shear stress Bed shear stress
800

G mB1 Fx u2  uS 1 ui upper and lower layers as

F  * m Eqi  2 qi
U y v2  vS p vi (3)
w hm w M m w N m
+ + =  * m qi (7)
Drag force Interfacial shear stress wt wx wy

where t is the time coordinate, ( x, y ) is the space Equation (7) is valid both in the Domains-A and B.
coordinates in a horizontal plane, (um , vm ) is the layer- The 2D2L model gives solution of velocity not only
outside but also inside of the vegetation.
averaged fluid velocity, m (= 1, 2) is the a subscript in- Although the original model is 2-D, it is applied
dicating the layers, (uS , vS ) = p (u1 , v1 ) : apparent velo- to a 1-D uniform flow examined in the present experi-
city in the canopy or the lower layer, ( M S = uS h1 , ment as discussed later.
N S = vS h1 ) is the apparent discharge fluxes of the ve-
getation canopy in the x and y directions, hm is the 3. Experimental setup
layer thickness (h1 = hv , h2 = H  h1 ) , H is the total Considering that willows are mostly vegetated
along the riparian zone as shown in the field measure-
water depth, hv is the vegetation height, g is the gra-
ment, a physical model experiment was carried out in
vity acceleration, zs is the water surface elevation, order to investigate hydrodynamics of riparian vegeta-
G mlA is the a delta function in which G mlA = 1 in Do- tion.
main-As lower layer and G mlA = 0 elsewhere, (W bx , W by )
is the bed shear stress vectors in the x and y dire-
ctions, U is the water density and (ui , vi ) is the in-
terfacial velocity in the x and y directions. The
layer-averaged Reynolds stresses ( uSc vSc , uSc2 ,  vSc2 )
are given by using the horizontal eddy viscosity in the
same manner as in the 1D1L model.
The drag forces ( Fx , Fy ) imposed on the vegeta-
tion are modeled as

U CD Oveg hV uS2 + vS2

( Fx , Fy ) = (uS , vS ) (4)
2

The drag force coefficient CD is given as fun-

ctions of vegetation parameters such as vegetation
density Oveg , stem diameter D , height hv and spa-
cing 'S of the trees. According to literatures, Oveg is
equivalent to the projected plant area per unit volume
as

D
Oveg = (5)
'S 2

* m in Eq.(3) is a switching parameter to distinguish

the layers as

* m = 1 , m = 1 for the lower layer (vegetation) (6a)

* m = 1 , m = 2 for the upper layer (6b) Fig.6 Experimental set-up

The entrainment velocity across the two-layer in- Test flume is an open channel with the length of
terface qi is provided by mass conservation for the 6.4 m and the width of 0.8 m as shown in Figs.6(a)
 801

and 6(b). The channels bed slope is adjustable ran- were measured by using a micro-propeller velocimeter.
ging between 1/300-1/2 000. A 0.035 m thick panel The measurement was made only on the left bank side,
was installed to simulate the floodplain and a trapezoi- considering the cross section to be axisymmetric to
dal compound cross-section was formed as shown in the central vertical axis. The surface velocity was
Fig.6(c). The vegetation simulated in the experiment measured by using the PIV technique.
is willow that is the most dominant species in our test
reach in the Kako River. Considering the river mor-
phology and the vegetation structure observed in the
test reach, a reduced scale ratio of the physical model
to the prototype is approximated to be about 1/50. As
was discussed in Section 1, most willows are concen-
trated in the riparian zone, a vegetation belt is arra-
nged at an edge of floodplain as shown in Figs.6(b)
and 6(c). Vertical wooden cylinders with hv = 0.06 m
in height and three different diameters, D = 0.003 m,
0.006 m and 0.012 m, were arranged in staggered
rows as shown in Figs.6(c) and 6(d). A flashboard in-
stalled at the channels downstream end was adjusted
so that a steady uniform flow condition was establi-
shed under a given discharge Q . A Cartesian coordi-
nate system ( x, y, z ) is defined as shown in Figs.6(b)
and 6(c), where the x - axis is originated at 0.80 m
distance from the channels upstream end and directed
to downstream, the y - axis is directed from the left to
the right bank and the z - axis is taken vertically up-
ward, respectively.
Table 1 Experimental conditions(Vegetation is emerged in
RUNs 1a-4a (Q = 10.0 L / s) and submerged in
Fig.7 Surface velocity vectors obtained by PIV analysis in the
RUNs 1b-4b (Q = 18.0 L / s) , respectively. The bed
cases of emerged vegetation
slope I was kept 1/1 000 in all RUNs)
Run Density Diameter Spacing Discharge
No. Oveg D (m) 'S (m) Q (L/s) 4. Experimental results
(m1) 4.1 Emerged vegetation
1a 10.0 Figure 7 shows surface velocity vectors obtained
0.5 0.006 0.110 by PIV in RUNs 1a, 2a, 3a and 4a that are the cases of
1b 18.0
emerged vegetation. The abscissa denotes distance
2a 10.0 along the streamwise direction x and the ordinate
0.003 0.055 shows distance from the left bank y , respectively.
2b 18.0
1.0 The velocity scale U SU is indicated by the vector
3a 10.0
0.012 0.110 arrows length and categorized by grey patterns. The
3b 18.0 black-colored dots are the tree models. It is shown that
4a 10.0 flow is significantly reduced in and around the vegeta-
2.0 0.006 0.055 tion. Flow is more significantly decelerated with in-
4b 18.0
creasing the vegetation density. The water surface
Hydraulic conditions in the experiment are listed rises as a result of obstruction to flow in the vegeta-
in Table 1. Eight experimental runs were carried out tion.
for various values of cylinder diameter D and discha- In Fig.8 velocity distributions in the spanwise
rge Q . The channel bed slope was fixed to be I = 1/ cross section are shown. In the figure, the grey pa-
ttern indicates magnitude of the stream-wise velocity
1 000. component and the vertical bars are the vegetation
The experiment was carried out for the two cases models. The abscissa is distance from the left bank y
of discharges, Q = 10 L/s and 18 L/s, which correspo-
and the ordinate is vertical distance from the channel
nds to the emerged vegetation and submerged vegeta- bed z , respectively. Flow is more decelerated in RUN
tion, respectively. Velocity profiles in a cross section
802
4a than in RUN 1a, because the former has a denser
vegetation of Oveg = 2.0 m 1 than the latter (Oveg =
1
0.5 m ) . As a result of the reduced flow conveyance
capacity in RUN 4a, the water surface level is higher
than that in RUN 1a.
Fig.8 Stream-wise velocity in a spanwise cross section (eme-
rged vegetation)
First, let us compare the velocity distributions be-
tween RUNs 2a and 3a. Both of them have the same
vegetation density, Oveg = 1.0 m 1 but the stem diame-
ter D is smaller in RUN 2a ( D = 0.003 m) than in
RUN 3a ( D = 0.012 m) . The velocity profile is simi-
lar to each other but flow in the vegetation is faster in
RUN 3a than in RUN 2a. This means that vegetation
causes more significant obstruction to the flow in a
case of thicker stem or narrower vegetation spacing
'S .
Secondly, let us compare the flow structures be-
tween RUNs 1a and 3a. Both of them have the same
vegetation spacing of 'S = 0.11 m , but the vegetation
density is smaller in RUN 1a (Oveg = 0.5 m 1 ) than in
RUN 3a (Oveg = 1.0 m 1 ) . The velocity observed in
both RUNs has a similar profile but flow in the ve-
getation at y = 0.20 m is faster in RUN 1a than in
RUN 3a. This result shows that vegetation brings
more significant obstruction to flow in vegetation with
thicker stem.
Fig.9 Surface velocity vectors obtained by PIV analysis in the
cases of submerged vegetation
4.2 Submerged vegetation
Figure 9 shows surface velocity vectors from the
PIV measurement for RUNs 1b, 2b, 3b and 4b. They
are the cases of submerged vegetation, where the coo-
rdinate system is the same as in Fig.7. Description of
velocity vectors are in the same manner as in Fig.7.
Compared to the emerged case, the surface flow is not
so much reduced even over the vegetated area. In
other words, a remarkable velocity difference is not

recognized between the floodplain and the main cha-
nnel in the surface layer when the vegetation is sub-
merged under water. Especially, in RUN 1b that has
the sparsest vegetation among the cases, the surface
velocity is very uniformly distributed in the span-wise
direction. Therefore, the PIV that measures only the
surface velocity is not a proper technique for estima-
ting discharge in rivers with submerged vegetation.
Fig.10 Stream-wise velocity in a spanwise cross section (sub-
merged vegetation)
803
Figure 10 shows velocity contours in the spanwi-
se cross section for the submerged vegetation. The
data are represented in the same manner as in Fig.8. A
sharp two layer structure is developed in the area with
submerged vegetation, where flow over the vegetation
is much faster than that through the vegetation. As a
result, a predominant shear layer is generated along
the vegetation canopy. Focusing in the vegetation, ve-
locity gradually increases in the vertical direction,
which is driven by the fast flow running over the ve-
getation canopy. Flow near the water surface is little
influenced by the vegetation.
Fig.11 Dependencies of average velocities in the upper and
lower layers, (U wa ,U ve ) , and its fraction, U wa / U ve ,
on roughness density of vegetation Oveg
In order to furthermore examine the two-layer
flow characteristics, averaged velocities in the upper
and lower layers inside the vegetation belt, U wa and
U ve , are plotted against the roughness density of vege-
tation Oveg in Fig.11. Here, U wa and U ve are defi-
ned as cross-sectional average velocities in the layers
over and through the vegetation, respectively (see
Fig.5(b)). The average velocity for the emerged vege-
tation U is also plotted for comparison. The lines in
the figure are the best fitting curves to the experimen-
tal data. The figure shows that the velocity ratio
U wa / U ve monotonically increases with increasing
Oveg . This means that, with increasing the vegetation
density, acceleration of the upper layer is more signi-
ficant than deceleration in the vegetation layer.
4.3 Comparison between experiment and hydrodyna-
mic model: Emerged vegetation
Figure 12 shows spanwise profiles of the surface
velocity from the PIV measurement and the depth-
averaged velocity u obtained from the micro-prope-
ller velocimeter in the case of emerged vegetation.
They are compared with the analytical solution u
from 1D1L model that are shown in solid curves. A
804
drag-force coefficient CD proposed for prototype was
not well fitted to the present experiment. Therefore,
CD and Mannings roughness coefficient n were
identified by considering the experimental results. As
results, CD = 2.0 is identified in the analysis to provi-
de the best fitting solutions. Mannings roughness
coefficient n for the wall friction is fixed to be n =
0.015 so that the analytical solution is fitted to the
experimental data.
Fig.12 Experimental results of velocity profiles in the case of
emerged vegetation, which is compared with analytical
solutions computed by the 1D1L model
Despite adjusting the model parameters in this
way, there is still a difference between the experiment
and the analysis. Since the depth-averaged velocity
and the surface velocity from PIV are well correlated
each other, it is confirmed that both of the velocity
Fig.13 Solutions of spanwise velocity profiles, comparison of
the laboratory data with the 1D1L and 2D2L models
measurements were correctly conducted. The problem
might be left in the modeling of vegetation drag force,
where velocity is overestimated by the model especia-
lly in the main channel. Although a homogeneous po-
rous body is assumed in the numerical model of ripa-
rian vegetation, the physical model has a different st-
ructure consisting of a few tree streets. This may be
one of the reasons why there is a gap between the ana-
lysis and experiment. It is expected that the analytical
solution asymptotically approaches to the experiment
with increasing the vegetation density. However, a
macro flow structure around a tree becomes more pre-
dominant in a case of sparser vegetation in which the
assumption of homogeneous porous structure of vege-
tation is no more valid. Another reason of poor fi-
tting to the experimental data may come from scale

effect in the physical model. However, little examina-
tion is completed so far regarding the scale effect.
4.4 Comparison between experiment and hydrodyna-
mic model: Submerged vegetation
The 1D1L model is no longer available in the
case of submerged vegetation. As was discussed
above, predominant shear stress is generated around
the outer edge of vegetation where the depth-averaged
velocity is no more valid even in shallow flows like
rivers. The 2D2L model provides solutions for the
cases not only of emerged (RUN *a in Table 1) but
also submerged vegetations (RUN *b in the table).
Spanwise profiles of the layer-averaged velocity (u1 ,
u2 ) are shown in Fig.13, where the numerical solu-
tion of 2D2L model is compared with the experimen-
tal data obtained from the probe measurements. The
surface velocity from the PIV measurements is also
plotted for reference. Figure 13(a) is the result from
emerged vegetation, where the solution from the
1D1L model is plotted in broken lines for comparison.
Figure 13(b) is for the cases of submerged vegetation
and average velocity both in the upper and lower laye-
rs are given by the 2D2L model.
In Fig.13(a), both the 1D1L and 2D2L models
are in good agreement with the experiment, although
the models slightly overestimate velocity in the main
channel. Small discrepancy between the two models
may come from the effect of spanwise advection as
discussed by Rameshwaran and Shiono[7].
Fig.14 Comparison of the results in Fig.11 with the solution of
2D2L model
In the case of submerged vegetation in Fig.13(b),
the layer-averaged velocities given by the 2D2L
model qualitatively shows a similar tendency with the
experiment. However, the velocity is still overestima-
ted by the model in the main channel, especially in
RUN 4b. The experimental results of layer-averaged
velocities (U wa , U ve ) and U wa / U ve are compared with
the analytical solution as shown in Fig.14. Although
the solutions of functional dependencies of (U wa ,U ve ,
805
U wa / U ve ) on Oveg qualitatively agree with the expe-
rimental data, the difference between the analysis and
experiment in U wa / U ve is not negligible.
The estimation error found in the analysis may be
caused by the same reason as Fig.13. Therefore,
model parameters, such as diameter and roughness
density of vegetation, etc., should be identified so as
vegetation in the numerical model to be hydrodyna-
mically equivalent to that in the physical model. Scale
effects in the physical model might be another possi-
ble reason to bring the estimation error. Additional
physical model experiments should be carried out in a
larger test flume with wider vegetational conditions of
denser and more cylinder rows.
Besides such a discrepancy between the analysis
and experiment, the flow and shear layer structure in
and around the riparian vegetation are quantitatively
reproduced by the 2D2L model.
5. Conclusions
In this study, hydrodynamics of riparian vegeta-
tion has been experimentally and theoretically investi-
gated in order to examine feasibility of utilizing the ri-
parian vegetation as a natural structure for protecting
the main channels revetment. For preparing a physi-
cal model experiment, a field study was conducted to
investigate ecological structures of willow vegetation.
A laboratory experiment was carried out in hydraulic
conditions ranging from the emerged to the subme-
rged vegetation. The experimental result has been
compared with solutions provided by a 1D1L model
and a 2D2L model. The findings are summarized as
follows.
(1) Based on a field measurement in a densely
vegetated river reach, it is found that most of willows
tend to be concentrated in riparian zones in front of
the main channel.
(2) A PIV measurement was performed to obtain
velocity distribution on the water surface. A velocity
distribution in a cross section was also measured by
using a micro-propeller velocimeter. In the case of
submerged vegetation, the surface velocity from PIV
is much higher than the layer-averaged velocity. The-
refore, the PIV is not a suitable technique for estima-
ting discharge in a river with submerged vegetation.
On the other hand, in the case of emerged vegetation,
the PIV measurement is well correlated with the point
measurement with the micro-propeller velocimeter. It
is found that flow is more significantly reduced in and
around the denser vegetation. In this manner flow con-
veyance capacity in a river is decreased by riparian
vegetation.
(3) Vegetation brings more significant obstru-
ction to flow in a case of thicker stem or narrower ve-
getation spacing 'S , which is known from the eme-
806
rged vegetation.
(4) In the case of submerged vegetation, a well-
defined two-layered flow structure is produced in the
area of submerged vegetation. The flow over the vege-
tation is much faster than the flow through the vegeta-
tion. Velocity gradually increases in the vertical dire-
ction, which is driven by the fast flow running over
the vegetation canopy. Flow near the water surface is
little influenced by the vegetation. Functional depen-
dencies of the layer-averaged velocities, U wa and U ve ,
on the vegetation density Oveg have been examined. It
is found that U wa / U ve monotonically increases with
increasing Oveg .
(5) The experimental results for the emerged ve-
getation are compared with the 1D1L model analysis.
Although the analytical solution for spanwise velocity
profile shows a qualitative agreement with the experi-
ment, the 1D1L model tends to overestimate the velo-
city especially in the main channel. The 2D2L model
developed by the authors is applied for analyzing both
of the emerged and submerged vegetation. The
model shows a certain level of performance in repro-
ducing shear flow structure around the riparian vege-
tation. However, discrepancy between the analysis
and the laboratory data is not negligible for some
cases. A larger scale test flume and vegetation models
are recommended so that the flow configuration in the
physical model approaches to that assumed in the ana-
lytical models.
The riparian vegetation has been modeled by
rigid sticks both in the laboratory experiment and the
numerical analysis, while willows are actually flexible
and waving when they are submerged under water.
Since there must be difference in hydrodynamic beha-
viors between the prototype and model vegetation,
one should be careful about this point when the 2D2L
is applied to a prototype riparian vegetation. It is one
of the most important issues in the next version of
2D2L model to take fluctuation and turbulence produ-
ction of flexible bluff bodies like willows into consi-
deration.
Acknowledgements
The study was supported by the Himeji River
Road Management Office, the Ministry of Land, In-
frastructure, Transport and Tourism. The present
study was financially supported by the Grant-in-Aid
for Scientific Research (B) (Grant No. 23360212, Lea-
der: Kohji Michioku).
References
[1] ZONG L., NEPF H. Flow and deposition in and around
a finite patch of vegetation[J]. Geomorphology, 2010,
116: 363-372.
[2] ZONG L., NEPF H. Spatial distribution of deposition
within a patch of vegetation[J[. Water Resources Re-
search, 2011, 47: W03516.
[3] ROMINGER J., NEPF H. Flow adjustment and interior
flow associated with a rectangular porous obstruction[J].
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2011, 680: 636-659.
[4] WHITE B., NEPF H. Shear instability and coherent st-
ructures in a flow adjacent to a porous layer[J]. Journal
of Fluid Mechanics, 2007, 593: 1-32.
[5] NIKORA N., NIKORA V. A viscous drag concept for
flow resistance in vegetated channels[C]. Proceedings
of 32nd IAHR Congress. Venice, Italy, 2007.
[6] HELMI T. Unsteady 1D flow model of compound
channel with vegetated floodplains[J]. Journal of Hy-
drology, 2002, 269(1-2): 89-99.
[7] RAMESHWARAN P., SHIONO K. Quasi two-dimen-
sional model for straight overbank flows through eme-
rgent vegetation on floodplains[J]. Journal of Hydrau-
lic Research, 2007, 45(3): 302-315.
[8] MARTIN-VIDE J. P., MORETA P. J. M. and LPEZ-
QUEROL S. L. Improved 1-D modelling in compound
meandering channels with vegetated floodplain[J].
Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2008, 46(2): 265-276.
[9] SUKHODOLOV A., SUKHODOLOVA T. Case study:
Effect of submerged aquatic plants on turbulence stru-
cture in a lowland river[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engi-
neering, ASCE, 2010 136(7): 434-446.
[10] SHIMIZU Y., TSUJIMOTO T. Numerical analysis of
turbulent open-channel flow over a vegetation layer
using a k - H turbulence model[J]. Journal of Hydro-
science Hydraulic Engineering, 1994, 11: 57-67.
[11] LOPEZ F., GARCIA M. Open channel flow through si-
mulated vegetation: Turbulence modelling and sediment
transport[R]. University of Illinois, 1997.
[12] FISCHER-ANTZE T., STOESSER T. and BATES P. et
al. 3D numerical modelling of open-channel flow with
submerged vegetation[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Resea-
rch, 2001, 39(3): 303-310.
[13] CUI J., NEARY V. S. LES study of turbulent flows
with submerged vegetation[J]. Journal of Hydraulic
Research, 2008, 46(3): 307-316.
[14] MICHIOKU K., MIYAMOTO H. and KANDA K. et al.
H-ADCP food routing and flow modeling for evaluation
of flow conveyance capacity in a tree-vegetated river
channel[C]. Proceedings of 34th IAHR Congress.
Brisbane, Australia, 2011.
[15] TANIGUCHI M., AGA K. and MICHIOKU K. et al.
Hydrodynamic influence of vegetated floodplain mor-
phology on drag force moment acting on trees[C].
Proceedings of 35th IAHR World Congress. Chengdu,
China, 2013.