Effect and influencing factors of sediment discharge in Haibowan Reservoir

doi:10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2023.00014

Journal of Desert Research ›› 2023, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (5): 9-17.DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2023.00014

Previous Articles Next Articles

Effect and influencing factors of sediment discharge in Haibowan Reservoir

Kezhi Wang¹(), Xiaomin Liu¹^,²^,³(), Tingxi Liu¹^,², Yaotian Yang²^,³^,⁴, Qiang Luo⁵

^1.College of Water Conservancy and Civil Engineering，Inner Mongolia Agricultural University，Hohhot 010018，China
^2.Collaborative Innovation Center for Integrated Management of Water Resources and Water Environment in the Inner Mongolia Reaches of the Yellow River，Hohhot 010018，China
^3.Inner Mongolia Yellow River Ecological Research Institute，Hohhot 010020，China
^4.Inner Mongolia Jinhua Yuan Environmental Resource Engineering Consulting Co. ，Ltd. ，Hohhot 010020，China
^5.Yellow River Haibowan Water Conservancy Project Development Center，Wuhai 016000，Inner Mongolia，China

Received:2022-12-28 Revised:2023-01-25 Online:2023-09-20 Published:2023-09-27
Contact: Xiaomin Liu

Abstract

Abstract:

Haibowan Reservoir is a leading reservoir in the Inner Mongolia section of the Yellow River， and its sediment discharge effect has an important impact on the operation of the reservoir and the sediment deposition in the Inner Mongolia section of the Yellow River. The sediment discharge ratio of the reservoir is a key indicator to describe the sediment transport characteristics of the reservoir. The larger the sediment discharge ratio， the smaller the proportion of sediment in the reservoir. Based on the measured data of Haibowan Reservoir from 2014 to 2021， the characteristics of sediment discharge were analyzed， and the main factors affecting the change of sediment discharge ratio were discussed by correlation analysis. The results show that the annual average sediment discharge ratio of the reservoir is 19.35%， which is obviously smaller than the design value， and the ideal sediment discharge effect is not produced. The siltation and sediment discharge mainly occur in flood season， and the characteristics of "more coming and more discharging" are presented during large discharge period. The change of sediment discharge ratio is mainly affected by the water and sediment conditions， the operation mode of the reservoir and the topography. The sediment discharge ratio has a positive correlation with the inflow flow and the coordination of water and sediment in and out of the reservoir， and has a negative correlation with the water level in front of the dam and the flood detention time. The distribution of the reservoir topography is narrow at the top and wide at the bottom， steep at the top and slow at the bottom， and the inflow of wind-blown sand in the Ulanbu Desert have a negative impact on the sediment discharge ratio. The regression analysis shows that the sediment discharge ratio in flood season is mainly affected by the flood detention time and the empirical formula for sediment discharge ratio in flood season is established. The results can provide reference for the optimization of water and sediment control in Haibowan Reservoir.

Key words: sediment discharge ratio, inflow flow, flood detention time, Haibowan Reservoir

CLC Number:

TV697.2

Kezhi Wang, Xiaomin Liu, Tingxi Liu, Yaotian Yang, Qiang Luo. Effect and influencing factors of sediment discharge in Haibowan Reservoir[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2023, 43(5): 9-17.

Figures/Tables 9

References 25

1	Yang S L， Milliman J D， Xu K H，et al.Downstream sedimentary and geomorphic impacts of the Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River［J］.Earth-Science Reviews，2014，138：469-486.
2	Dahal S， Crosato A， Omer A Y A，et al.Validation of model-based optimization of reservoir sediment releases by dam removal［J］.Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management，2021，147（7）：4021033.
3	Brune G M.Trap efficiency of reservoirs［J］.Eos，Transactions，American Geophysical Union，1953，34（3）：407-418.
4	韩其为.水库淤积［M］.北京：科学出版社，2003：265-266.
5	张红武，张欧阳，张俊华，等.泾河东庄水库排沙试验研究［J］.水力发电学报，2004，23（4）：82-87.
6	侯素珍，胡恬，杨飞，等.三门峡水库汛期排沙效果研究［J］.水利学报，2021，52（4）：393-400.
7	金中武，任实，吴华莉，等.三峡水库淤积排沙及河型转化规律［J］.长江科学院院报，2020，37（10）：9-15.
8	陈桂亚，袁晶，许全喜.三峡工程蓄水运用以来水库排沙效果［J］.水科学进展，2012，23（3）：355-362.
9	董占地，胡海华，吉祖稳，等.三峡水库排沙比对来水来沙的响应［J］.泥沙研究，2017，42（6）：16-21.
10	朱玲玲，许全喜，董炳江，等.金沙江下游溪洛渡水库排沙效果及影响因素［J］.水科学进展，2021，32（4）：544-555.
11	傅旭东，姜立伟，吴保生，等.黄河下游河道场次洪水排沙比及其不确定性［J］.中国科学：技术科学，2010，40（4）：349-357.
12	刘尚武，张小峰，许全喜，等.三峡水库区间来沙量估算及水库排沙效果分析［J］.湖泊科学，2019，31（1）：28-38.
13	陈琼，刘晓民，刘廷玺，等.海勃湾枢纽对坝后河道冲淤的影响［J］.中国沙漠，2022，42（3）：139-147.
14	李振全.黄河石嘴山至巴彦高勒段风沙入黄量研究［D］.西安：西安理工大学，2019.
15	刘尚武，张鹏，苗蔚，等.嘉陵江不同区域场次洪水输沙规律［J］.水科学进展，2022，33（1）：38-47.
16	龙孝平.三峡水库排沙比与水沙响应关系研究［D］.重庆：重庆交通大学，2020.
17	Haghjouei H， Rahimpour M， Qaderi K，et al.Experimental investigation of the diameter and length effects of the dendritic，bottomless，extended structure on reservoir sediment removal efficiency by flushing［J］.Journal of Hydro-environment Research，2022，45：15-28.
18	郜国明，谈广鸣，李涛，等.小浪底水库排沙指标及2015年应用分析［J］.应用基础与工程科学学报，2019 （2）：275-283.
19	田世民，郭建英，尚红霞，等.乌兰布和沙漠风沙入黄量研究［J］.人民黄河，2017，39（7）：65-70.
20	侯素珍，胡恬，路新川，等.万家寨水库排沙运用效果分析［J］.泥沙研究，2021，46（6）：9-15.
21	任智慧，王婷，曲少军.万家寨水库库区冲淤特点分析［C］//水库大坝高质量建设与绿色发展：中国大坝工程学会2018学术年会论文集，2018.
22	任红俊，刘页清，路新川.万家寨水库泥沙淤积分析［J］.电力学报，2005，20（4）：438-440.
23	陆宗磐，贾世良，任红俊.万家寨水库初期运用及泥沙冲淤分析［J］.水利水电工程设计，2006，25（4）：17-19.
24	任红俊，熊运阜.万家寨水库淤积现状及排沙方案探讨［J］.山西水利，2002 （6）：49-50.
25	韦诗涛，梁艳洁，陈翠霞.黄河海勃湾水库排沙运用方式研究［C］//水库大坝高质量建设与绿色发展：中国大坝工程学会 2018 学术年会论文集，2018.

年份	入库流量/(m³·s^-1)			出库流量/(m³·s^-1)			入库输沙率/(t·s^-1)			坝前最低水位/m	水库排沙比/%
年份	均值	最大值	出现时间	均值	最大值	出现时间	均值	最大值	出现时间	坝前最低水位/m	水库排沙比/%
2014	1 084	1 640	10-15	1 040	1 760	10-20	2.206	6.940	08-20	1 070.00	13.94
2015	792	1 610	10-14	741	1 430	10-15	1.522	10.305	08-15	1 070.00	9.14
2016	695	1 480	10-19	691	1 140	10-28	1.454	11.100	10-20	1 070.00	9.84
2017	810	1 440	10-26	777	1 380	10-26	1.581	4.680	08-24	1 070.52	8.03
2018	2 284	3 480	10-07	2 204	3 470	10-10	10.812	87.800	07-28	1 071.50	15.13
2019	2 094	3 060	07-20	1 946	2 980	07-21	4.828	9.820	08-02	1 069.08	20.74
2020	2 294	3 330	08-25	2 214	3 290	08-25	4.617	20.787	08-11	1 067.68	62.16
2021	1 044	2 200	10-23	1 346	2 100	10-24	1.123	7.589	10-24	1 073.18	15.04

年份	入库流量/(m³·s^-1)			出库流量/(m³·s^-1)			入库输沙率/(t·s^-1)			坝前最低水位/m	水库排沙比/%
年份	均值	最大值	出现时间	均值	最大值	出现时间	均值	最大值	出现时间	坝前最低水位/m	水库排沙比/%
2014	1 084	1 640	10-15	1 040	1 760	10-20	2.206	6.940	08-20	1 070.00	13.94
2015	792	1 610	10-14	741	1 430	10-15	1.522	10.305	08-15	1 070.00	9.14
2016	695	1 480	10-19	691	1 140	10-28	1.454	11.100	10-20	1 070.00	9.84
2017	810	1 440	10-26	777	1 380	10-26	1.581	4.680	08-24	1 070.52	8.03
2018	2 284	3 480	10-07	2 204	3 470	10-10	10.812	87.800	07-28	1 071.50	15.13
2019	2 094	3 060	07-20	1 946	2 980	07-21	4.828	9.820	08-02	1 069.08	20.74
2020	2 294	3 330	08-25	2 214	3 290	08-25	4.617	20.787	08-11	1 067.68	62.16
2021	1 044	2 200	10-23	1 346	2 100	10-24	1.123	7.589	10-24	1 073.18	15.04

年份	流量过程	入库		坝前最低水位/m	出库		排沙比 /%
年份	流量过程	平均流量 /(m³·s^-1)	平均输沙率 /(t·s^-1)	坝前最低水位/m	平均流量 /(m³·s^-1)	平均输沙率 /(t·s^-1)	排沙比 /%
2014	10-18—10-26	1 332	3.470	1 073.0	1 317	0.416	11.99
2015	07-06—07-16	1 043	1.959	1 073.6	975	0.252	12.88
2016	09-05—09-18	884	1.271	1 073.5	851	0.139	10.97
2016	10-18—10-31	1 033	3.617	1 072.5	974	0.161	4.46
2017	10-10—11-07	1 216	2.601	1 074.3	1 169	0.305	11.89
2018	09-20—10-15	3 241	6.006	1 072.5	3 168	1.611	26.83
2019	06-27—07-25	2 747	6.856	1 069.1	2 613	2.792	40.73
2019	07-27—08-04	2 460	6.648	1 072.4	2 279	1.228	18.47
2020	08-10—09-11	2 990	6.691	1 071.0	2 927	2.980	44.54
2021	09-18—10-03	1 297	2.534	1 074.0	1 257	0.307	12.12

年份	流量过程	入库		坝前最低水位/m	出库		排沙比 /%
年份	流量过程	平均流量 /(m³·s^-1)	平均输沙率 /(t·s^-1)	坝前最低水位/m	平均流量 /(m³·s^-1)	平均输沙率 /(t·s^-1)	排沙比 /%
2014	10-18—10-26	1 332	3.470	1 073.0	1 317	0.416	11.99
2015	07-06—07-16	1 043	1.959	1 073.6	975	0.252	12.88
2016	09-05—09-18	884	1.271	1 073.5	851	0.139	10.97
2016	10-18—10-31	1 033	3.617	1 072.5	974	0.161	4.46
2017	10-10—11-07	1 216	2.601	1 074.3	1 169	0.305	11.89
2018	09-20—10-15	3 241	6.006	1 072.5	3 168	1.611	26.83
2019	06-27—07-25	2 747	6.856	1 069.1	2 613	2.792	40.73
2019	07-27—08-04	2 460	6.648	1 072.4	2 279	1.228	18.47
2020	08-10—09-11	2 990	6.691	1 071.0	2 927	2.980	44.54
2021	09-18—10-03	1 297	2.534	1 074.0	1 257	0.307	12.12

时段	水量/亿m³			沙量/亿t			排沙比 /%
时段	年水量	汛期	非汛期	年沙量	汛期	非汛期	排沙比 /%
1992—2002年	211.7	91.8	119.9	0.919	0.626	0.293	45.5~53.6
1968—2006年+1956—1966年	265.9	153.1	112.9	1.272	0.973	0.298	58.6
2014—2021年	303.2	147.2	156.1	0.581	0.374	0.207	19.35

Effect and influencing factors of sediment discharge in Haibowan Reservoir

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 9

References 25

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments