赣江上游典型流域水沙过程及驱动因素

丁倩倩; 刘友存; 焦克勤; 边晓辉; 刘燕

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2018.04.004

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

赣江上游典型流域水沙过程及驱动因素

试验研究

- 赣江上游典型流域水沙过程及驱动因素
- Changes and Driving Factors of Runoff and Sediment Yield of Typical Watershed in Upper Reaches of Ganjiang River
- 水土保持通报 2018年38卷第4期页码：19-26
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 江西理工大学建筑与测绘工程学院,江西,赣州,341000
  2. 江西理工大学资源与环境工程学院,江西,赣州,341000
  3. 中国科学院西北生态环境资源研究院,甘肃,兰州,730000
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目“高山寒区流域侵蚀沉积与痕量元素迁移及其交互作用”（41471001）;赣州市重点研发计划项目（赣市财教字[2017]179号）、江西理工大学“清江学者”拔尖人才科研启动项目（JXUSTQJBJ2017002）
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2018.04.004
  中图分类号：
- 纸质出版：2018
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
丁倩倩, 刘友存, 焦克勤, 等. 赣江上游典型流域水沙过程及驱动因素[J]. 水土保持通报, 2018,38(4):19-26.

DING Qianqian, Liu Youcun, JIAO Keqin, et al. Changes and Driving Factors of Runoff and Sediment Yield of Typical Watershed in Upper Reaches of Ganjiang River[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2018, 38(4): 19-26.
丁倩倩, 刘友存, 焦克勤, 等. 赣江上游典型流域水沙过程及驱动因素[J]. 水土保持通报, 2018,38(4):19-26. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2018.04.004.

DING Qianqian, Liu Youcun, JIAO Keqin, et al. Changes and Driving Factors of Runoff and Sediment Yield of Typical Watershed in Upper Reaches of Ganjiang River[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2018, 38(4): 19-26. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2018.04.004.

摘要

[目的

]

对赣江上游典型流域水沙过程及驱动因素进行分析，为该区域土壤侵蚀治理、土地利用和功能调整等工作提供科学依据。[方法

]

根据桃江流域1980—2015年逐日水沙实测资料，运用Mann-Kendall突变检验法及其它统计方法分析了桃江流域的水沙变化特征，结合水文法、双累积曲线法对降水量、径流量和输沙量三者之间的相互关系进行探讨，并以此来确定桃江流域水沙变化的驱动因素。[结果

]

①桃江流域输沙量呈现显著减小趋势，突变时间出现在2005年，径流量同样出现递减趋势，但其递减趋势不甚显著，其递减时间开始于2003年。②径流量和输沙量突变开始的时间不同，水沙特性的划分阶段亦不同：径流量可划分为1980—2002年和2003—2015年2个阶段，输沙量可划分为1980—2004年和2005—2015年两个阶段。③桃江流域径流量在2003—2015年时段内年均减少量为7.26×10

，输沙量在2005—2015年时段内年均减少量为8.82×10

t。④人类活动引起的减水量为5.77×10

/a，占总减水量的76.8%；减沙量为8.44×10

t/a，占总减沙量的95.7%。[结论

]

研究区内水沙均呈减少趋势，其中输沙量减少显著。降水与人类活动引起的减水减沙量的比值约为4∶1。

Abstract

[Objective] Studying the processes and driving factors of runoff and sediment in a typical watershed in the upper reaches of Ganjiang River

to provide bases for soil erosion control

land use and function adjustment in this area.[Methods] Daily runoff

sediment and precipitation data from 1980-2015 were used in this study. The characteristics and relationships between precipitation

runoff and sediment yield were analyzed by using Mann-Kendall method

hydrological method and double mass curve

from this the driving factors of runoff and sediment yield changes were determined.[Results] ① There was a significant decrease in sediment yield

while an abrupt change appeared in 2005. From 2003

the runoff yield also showed a decreasing but not apparent trend. ② Runoff and sediment yield were different in term of the beginning time of the abrupt change. The change of runoff was divided into two phases

which were from 1980 to 2002 and from 2003 to 2015

while the sediment yield had two change phases of 1980-2004 and 2005-2015. ③ The decrease value of annual average runoff during 2003-2015 was 7.26×1010 m3. The decrease value of average annual sediment yield during the period of 2005-2015 was 8.82×107 t. ④ The runoff reduction volume caused by human activities was 5.77×1010 m3/a

accounting for 76.8% of the total; the sediment decrease was 8.44×107 t/a

accounting for 95.7% of the total sediment yield.[Conclusion] Runoff and sediment yield were all reduced

and the amount of sediment yield was reduced significantly. Either for runoff reduction or for sediment discharge

the ratios caused by precipitation and human activities was about 4:1.

关键词

Keywords

references

Hoefel F, Elgar S. Wave-induced sediment transport and sandbar migration[J]. Science, 2003,299(5614):1885-1887.

Jerolmack D J, Paola C. Shredding of environmental signals by sediment transport[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2010,37(19):470-479.

Milan J, Bromley R G. The impact of sediment consistency on track and undertrack morphology:Experiments with emu tracks in layered cement[J]. Ichnos, 2007,15(1):19-27.

Blanco C H, Lal R. Principles of soil conservation and management[J]. Vadose Zone Journal, 2010,9(1):199-200.

Chen Liding, Wei Wei, Fu Bojie, et al. Soil and water conservation on the Loess Plateau in China:Review and perspective[J]. Progress in Physical Geography, 2007,31(4):389-403.

钱宁.万兆惠.泥沙运动力学[M].北京:科学出版社,1983.

Miao Chiyuan, Ni Jinren, Alistair G L B. Recent changes of water discharge and sediment load in the Yellow River basin, China[J]. Progress in Physical Geography, 2010,34(4):541-561.

Wang Houjie, Bi Naishuang, Saito Yoshiki, et al. Recent changes in sediment delivery by the Huanghe(Yellow River) to the sea:Causes and environmental implications in its estuary[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2010,391(3):302-313.

孙志林,张超凡,杜利华,等.非均匀悬移质输沙率[J].水利学报,2016,47(4):501-508.

钟德钰,张磊,王光谦.泥沙运动力学研究进展和前沿[J].水利水电科技进展,2015,35(5):52-58.

郭庆超.天然河道水流挟沙能力研究[J].泥沙研究,2006(5):45-51.

Liu Youcun, Metivier F, Gaillardet J, et al. Erosion rates deduced from seasonal mass balance along the upper Urumqi River in Tianshan[J]. Solid Earth, 2011,2(2):283-301.

朱玲玲,董先勇,陈泽方.金沙江下游梯级水库淤积及其对三峡水库影响研究[J].长江科学院院报,2017,34(3):1-7.

胡春宏,王延贵,张燕菁.河流泥沙模拟技术进展与展望[J].水文,2006,26(3):37-41.

窦国仁.黄河小浪底工程泥沙问题的研究[J].水利水运科学研究,1995(3):197-209.

胡春宏,方春明.三峡工程泥沙问题解决途径与运行效果研究[J].中国科学:技术科学,2017,47(8):832-844.

李强,王义民,白涛.黄河水沙调控研究综述[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2014,42(12):227-234.

赵中华.基于AnnAGNPS模型的桃江流域农业非点源污染研究[D]. 江西南昌:南昌大学,2012.

赵淑云,苗帅升,刘友存,等.赣江上游典型流域输沙过程及对降水与径流变化的响应:以贡水流域为例[J].江西理工大学学报,2018,39(1):37-43.

Searcy J K, Hardison C H. Double-mass Curves[M]. U S:Bytes, 1960.

刘友存,刘志方,郝永红,等.基于交叉小波的天山乌鲁木齐河出山径流多尺度特征研究[J].冰川冻土,2013,35(6):1564-1572.

浏览量

1044

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

晋江西溪流域土地利用变化的输沙响应

2001—2020年内陆干旱草原县域尺度植被NDVI时空变化特征及其驱动因素

2011—2020年新疆鄯善县地下水位时空动态变化规律

地面坡度对地表径流影响的实验研究

长江中游城市群降碳-减污-扩绿-增长耦合协调的时空演变及影响机制