SINUOUOS CHANNEL PATTERN

Makalah
Tugas ini disusun untuk memenuhi mata kuliah Morfologi Sungai yang diampu oleh Dr. Very
Dermawan, ST., MT
Oleh :
YASINTA SURYA MAHARANI

145060400111016

BAHRUL ILMI AFANDI

145060400111020

HAFIDH BURHAN AZWAR

145060400111021

YOGA OKTA WARDANA

145060400111028

JENNY RETNANINGTYAS

145060400111029

MIFTAKHUL RAHMAH

145060400111031

ANGELINA TUTULENAN T

145060400111034

UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA
FAKULTAS TEKNIK
TEKNIK PENGAIRAN
MALANG
2016

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Issue Background
The windings of rivers have long fascinated their human observers. For
example, Aboriginal legend explains the sinuous pattern of the modern Finke as the
creation of the immense and powerful Rainbow Serpentasheemerged
duringtheDreamtime from deep waterholes. Recently in PNAS, a new theory for the
general origin of such sinuous ow patterns was published, which follows from a long
tradition in seeking a scientic explanation for the winding patterns of rivers.

1.2 Problem Identification

1.2.1

Definition of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

1.2.2

Formula of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

1.2.3

Planform of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

1.2.4

Problem of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

1.2.5

Solution of The Sinuous Channel Pattern Problem

1.3 Purpose Identificatiom

1.3.1 To know definition of The Sinuous Channel Pattern
1.3.2 To konow formula of The Sinuous Channel Pattern
1.3.3

To know planform of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

1.3.4

To know problem of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

1.3.5

To know solution of The Sinuous Channel Pattern Problem

CHAPTER II
DISCUSSION

2.1 Definition and Theory of Sinuous Channel Pattern

As described in the classic 1955 book, An Introduction to Fluvial Hydraulics
by Serge Leliavsky (18911963), two general schools of practical engineering
research developed in regard to alluvial rivers. One school was empirical, using
quantitative measures of river properties. For example, an observation that da Vinci
had ade qualitatively was quantified in the 19th century: there is a regular downstream
decrease in the size of sedimentary particles on a streambed that closely follows the
downstream decrease in the slope of that stream. This relationship, known as
Sternbergs Law, was used by Armin Schoklitsch (18881969) to infer an
explanation for river sinuosity.
Presuming from this law that a rivers slope must be adjusted to the
diameter of sediment transported, Schoklitsch reasoned that, if this slope of transport
is less than the average surface slope of the plain into which the river channel is
incised [i.e., the slope S used in Lazarus and Constantines theory], then it will be
necessary for the river to assume a winding path to make its channel slope equal to the
slope that is appropriate for the transported sediment size. Because the channel slope
is the ratio of vertical fall to the distance measured along the winding path of the
channel, dividing this number into the valley or surface slope, S, which is ratio of the
same vertical fall to the direct path down that valley, will yield a ratio of the distance
measured along the winding path of the channel to the distance along the more direct
path down the valley, which is by definition the sinuosity of the river.
Thus, like Lazarus and Constantines theory, the Schoklitsch theory places
emphasis on sinuosity in relation to surface slope, but unlike Lazarus and
Constantines theory, it does so in relation to the sediment size that the forces of the
river are transporting instead of the land-surface roughness R thatis opposing those
forces.The Schoklitsch explanation for meanderingaccords with the observation that
meandering generally takes place in the lower courses of rivers, where sediments are
relatively fine-grained and the corresponding slopes are relatively flat. However, as
noted by Leliavsky , the theory is not very useful to hydraulic engineers who need a

rational, mechanical formulation of the problem, which is the motivation for the
second school of alluvial river engineering.

Fig 1. Sinious Channel Pattern

2.2 Formula of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

Lazarus and Constantines theoryemploys a model of cellular topographyin
which flow finds a path of least resistanceacross a planar domain with a given slope
S.Furthermore, 40,000 model simulations revealthat, when the resistance R exceeds
S,both channel sinuosity and its variance increasewith increasing R/S. An
independent,corroborating test of this relationship isachieved by recognizing that R/S
can bethought of as a kind of Froude number,which is defined for channelized flows
asthe ratio of the mean flow velocity to a gravitationalwave velocity (square root of
flowdepth multiplied by gravitational acceleration).By substituting into this
expression thewell-known GaucklerManning formula thatrelatesmean flow velocity
to slope, flow depth,and the inverse of a roughness measure,Mannings n, a floodplain
Froude number isgenerated that redefines both the slope and nas applicable to the
floodplain rather than toa river channel, which results in an expressionfor S/R that is
calculated for 20 rivers fromaround the world. When the original R/S valuesgenerated
by themodel are inverted to S/Rvalues, it is found that the channel sinuosityvalues
associated with floodplain S/R datasetobtained from this Froude number
conventionplot right along with themodel-generatedensemble minima for
sinuosity.Lazarus and Constantine emphasize thattheir approach generates a set of
simplestcaseexplanations as a means of insolating.
Mannings equation:

However, Lazarus and Constantinenote that their simple formulation has a

potential for great applicability because R and Scan be determined from remote
sensing data,digital terrain maps, light detection andranging surveys, and other studies
that bypasstime-consuming and expensive in-channeldata collection.Finally, it is
relevant to observe that theGauklerManning formula used in Lazarusand
Constantines theory has the samephysical basis as an equation published in1776 by
Antoine de Chezy (17181798),who had been engaged to design a canal tosupply
water to the city of Paris.
Chezy recognizedthat because the gravitational forceacting on water moving
through a channel(proportional to depth slope) would haveto be opposed by an
equal but opposite resistingforce (proportional to velocity squared a measure of
resistance), velocity can beequated to the square root of the product ofslopemultiplied
by depth divided by the measureof resistance. Chezy Equation:

However, because this approachis based on Newtons third law, thisequation

can only apply at one instant in time. Thus, in covering both quasistatic channelsand
mobile channels, Lazarus and Constantinestheory definitely applies to theformer
because they do not change, but it canonly apply to the latter at a particular instantin
time relative to the overall evolution of theriver. This issue is similar to one raised
bygeologist J. Hoover Mackin (19051968) in his criticism of an explanation for
meanderingvery similar to that proposed by Schoklitsch. According to Mackin,
anyaccount of winding rivers in terms of theslope of a valley floor or other surface
leavesout a factor that would be very important toa geologist: the origin of that valley
floor orsurface. Evolving,mobile rivers, as opposed toquasistatic channelized flows,
create the valleyfloors and surfaces upon which they flow atany moment in time.

From this geologicalviewpoint, an explanation for the pattern of any evolving river
must include somethingabout the historical development of that river.
The meander ratio or sinuosity index is a means of quantifying how much a
river or stream meanders (how much its course deviates from the shortest possible
path). It is calculated as the length of the stream divided by the length of the valley. A
perfectly straight river would have a meander ratio of 1 (it would be the same length
as its valley), while the higher this ratio is above 1, the more the river meanders.
The sinuosity index has been used to separate single channel rivers into three
general classes: straight (SI < 1.05), sinuous (SI 1.05-1.5), and meandering (SI > 1.5)

Fig 2. Channel Pattern

2.3 Sinuous Channel Form
Beside on the form, Sinuous Channel devided in to there:
a. Sinuous Canal Form
The slope is ramp
Have the same relative width
Didnt braide
The channel is narrow and deep
Example :

Fig 3. Rio Cauto at Guamo Embarcadero River, Cuba

b. Sinuous Point Bar

The slope more steep
The straight part is more stable than the wider part

Fig 4. Point bar at the Gosong Sungai

Example :

Fig. 5. Bone River, Gorontalo

c. Sinuous Braided
Have the steepest slope
Rivers flow shifts radially
Have big bed load
Example :

Fig 6. Braided Stream

2.4 Problem of The Sinuous Channel Pattern

All the rivers flow tended to meander pattern forming (sinuous pattern). The
water that flows tend to be turbulent so arch and unevenness in the canals divert water
flow to the other side of the riverbank. Style water that hit the banks of the river,
causing erosion and weakening and make a small indentation in the river channel.
Due to continuously hit by the current, the curve becomes a great form bends
(meanders) were great. On the inside of the bend, so that the minimum speed to be

deposited sediment load. The precipitate which occurred at the height of the bend is
referred to as point bar. Two main processes around the bend in the river is the erosion
on the outer side of the bend and precipitation (depositional) on the inside of the bend
in the river, causing a round a bend (Meader loops) migrate laterally. Erosion
effectively run on the bending curve of the river so that the bend will be migrated. The
development curve of the bend and then become more circular and eventually will cut
round the river bend and be straight back. Turn that is truncated (cut off) in a circle
left bend into crescent-shaped lake that is better known as the oxbow lake.

2.5 Solution of The Sinuous Channel Patter Problem

How to cope precipitate on sinuous pattern is made of mangrove forests.
because the mangrove forests have ecological functions that are important, such as
damper waves and wind, coastal protection from abrasion, mudguard and trapping
sediments transported by water flow, as the breeding and feeding sites and is
spawning an assortment of aquatic biota, as fertilizer waters because it produces
detritus from leaf litter are broken down by bacteria into nutrients.

2.6 Sinuous Tubidite Channel

Isolated sinuous turbidite channels are usually identified by their characteristic
pattern on amplitude slices of volumes of 3D seismic. In some cases, they are
reasonably well imaged on 2D surveys, where one single line can image the same
channel several times due to the sinous nature of the channel.
Thick sinuous complexes appear to develop when slope equilibrium is reestablished in an area previously starved and oversteepened by tectonic activity
during the period of starvation, or oversteepened simply as a result of
hemipelagite deposition during a period of starvation (oversteepening does not
imply a precise angle, it corresponds to the contrast between the actual slope and
the equilibrium slope of the system at issue).
We use here the term sinuous channel for turbidite systems in order to
avoid confusion with meandering fluvial channels. Sinuous channels develop in
turbidite environments, when the density of turbidity currents is just slightly
higher than the density of seawater, i.e. the currents carry a very small amount
of sand. Sinuous channel fills are often shaly. Meandering (fluvial) channels
typically develop in low-grade fluvial plains and high amounts of sand are
deposited as point bars in the inner bends of the channels while the outer bank is
excavated. Notice that in classic sedimentology, a flow is sinuous when the ratio
of sinuosity, (distance between two points following the flow versus the shortest
distance between them), ranges between 1.5 and 2 and is meander-form when it
is higher than 2.
Seismic amplitude responses sometimes suggest that some sinuous
(turbidite) channels can be filled by sand. These would result from more complex
histories, where the sand infill is not associated with the process that built the
meanders, but by the passive infill in a later stage of meanders created during
episodes of low activity.
3
4
5

6
7
8
9
10
11
Fig. 7 The avulsion mechanism, that is to say, a sudden cutting off or separation of
land by an abrupt change in the course of the stream, in turbidite systems has been
treated by Flood et al. 1991. Avulsion typically leads to a steepening in slope, with
the new channel less sinuous than the old abandoned one. As the new channel
progressively re-establishes equilibrium, its sinuosity increases to reach a maximum
after which it essentially aggrades vertically.
Such complexes typically show the growth of a single channel over several hundreds
of ms (t.w.t.). The channel over that period of time usually shows a progressive increase
from lower to higher sinuosity. Most of the time, a maximum sinuosity is reached after a
while and pure aggradation occurs afterwards with progressive migration downslope
(sweep).
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Fig. 8 Contrary to fluvial meanders, which essentially get filled by progressive
lateral accretion, turbidite sinuous channels typically get filled by successive
episodes of cut and fill. Downcutting is interpreted to result from higher energy
flows and produces sinuous lows, which are further filled up by retrogradational
packages of turbidites. Like in fluvial meanders however, successive episodes of cut
and fill migrate laterally towards the concave bank due to the curvature of the
channel. Hence the similarity in the final geometry at seismic scale.
The main differences between fluvial and turbidite sinuous channels result
from the difference in accommodation (fig. 8). Accommodation in fluvial systems is
usually low, its rate of creation corresponding roughly to the subsidence of the area.
On the other hand, accommodation in turbidite systems is best defined as the
difference between the actual profile of the system and the equilibrium profile
corresponding to the sediment supplied to the system (flow volume and sand / mud
ratio). In many cases, accommodation for turbidite systems is very high, allowing for
high aggradation, whereas fluvial systems essentially migrate laterally. In other terms,
the ratio between lateral migration and aggradation is high to very high in fluvial
systems, and low in turbidite systems.
26
27

28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Fig. 9 Sinuous turbidite channels are created by low-density currents, slumps or
small high-density sand-rich turbidite flows. The bend evolution is characterized by
an increase in amplitude and decline of wavelength with a lack of sweep and
standstill of swing to attainment of channel stability. The channel evolution is
characterized by strong aggradation, progressive reduction of length and depth,
frequent avulsion, rare cut-off ridges and absence of swale topography. Fluvial
meandering channels are created by bed load, suspensions and hyperconcentrated
flow during flood events. Their bend evolution is characterized by an increase in
amplitude and decline in wavelength, bend translation downstream (sweep) and
laterally (swing) with repetition of bend sequence. The channel evolution is marked
by a quick lateral migration, length and depth stability, frequent cut-offs, and
development of ridge and swale topography.
Equilibrium profile is probably the main quantitative difference between
fluvial and turbiditic meander belts. For comparison, the equilibrium slope of

meandering rivers is in on the order of 1:10,000, that of turbidite meanders more

commonly ranges between 1:100 (Rhone) and 1:1000 (Indus) (see Clark and
Pickering, 1996, for a compete review).
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Fig. 10 Two well-expressed channel-levee complexes in the deep Gulf of Mexico are
shown above. The lower channel displays very clearly a succession of downcutting
events followed by rather aggradational dominated fill. Both channels can easily be
mapped, and are clearly highly sinuous in map view. Note that the migration is
unidirectional for each channel complex, indicating that the lateral component of
migration is predominant with respect to the downstream component.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baker, Victor R. 2013. Sinuous Rivers. Tucson: University of Arizona. Accessed: March 3,
2016.
Sukarno, Indratmo. 2014. Rekayasa Rekayasa Sungai. Malang. Accessed: March 6, 2016.
http://KamuTakPernahJalanSendiri/MorfologiSungai.html
Geochaching. 2009. Menomonee Rivers: Straight, Sinous, or Mandering. Accessed: March 6,
2016.
Tempo, Bella. 2013. Delta Sungai Batui Sulawesi Tengah. Sulawesi Tengah. Accesse : March
6, 2016. http://karinamelias.blogspot.co.id/2013/05/delta-batui-sulteng.html