Journals / International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

Bed Load Transport Estimations in Goodwin Creek Using Neural Network Methods

Pages
200–209
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was shown that ANN estimations for gravel bed load data are more successful than the sand load data.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Equations used for calculating bed load transport rates generally assume steady flow conditions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Similarly, the scarcity of accurate bed load field data obtained during the passage of floods is attributed to the difficulties, which at times can become life threatening, encountered under such conditions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was shown that ANN estimations for gravel bed load data are more successful than the sand load data.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Bed Load Transport · Artificial Neural Network · Creek

Abstract

Equations used for calculating bed load transport rates generally assume steady flow conditions. This assumes that the relationship of bed load transport as a function of water discharge, or some other flow parameter such as flow depth or boundary shear stress, is single-valued. One of the reasons for adopting such an approach is that almost all the pertinent laboratory data on bed load transport have been obtained from experiments performed under steady flow conditions. Similarly, the scarcity of accurate bed load field data obtained during the passage of floods is attributed to the difficulties, which at times can become life threatening, encountered under such conditions. Provision of data under difficult conditions may lead to inability to provide data in some cases and interruption in data continuity. It is extremely difficult to make predictions using classical statistical science in discontinuous or lack of data situations. Artificial neural networks (ANN) is a usefull tool to use in prediction inefficient or data conditions. In this study two Artificial Neural Network (ANN) methods, radial basis functions and generalized regression neural network are employed to estimate the bed load data. It was seen that the ANN estimations are more satisfactory compared to those of the conventional statistical methods results. It was shown that ANN estimations for gravel bed load data are more successful than the sand load data.

🔖

Cite This Article

DİKİCİ, M., AKSEL, M., COKGOR, S. (2022). Bed Load Transport Estimations in Goodwin Creek Using Neural Network Methods. International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 200–209. https://ajindex.com/articles/540960

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ali, K. M., and Pazzani, M. J. (1996). “Error reduction through learning multiple descriptions.” Machine Learning, 24(3), 173–202. ASCE Task Committee. (2000a). “Artificial Neural Networks in Hydrology. II: Hydrologic Applications.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, 5(2), 124–137. ASCE Task Committee. (2000b). “Artificial Neural Networks in Hydrology. I: Preliminary Concepts.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, 5(2), 115–123.
  2. Bayazit, M. (1996). “Mechanism of Sediment Transport.” Post-Graduate Course in Sediment Transport Technology, Ankara, 5–19.
  3. Bayazit, M. (2000). “Sediment Transport Technology.” Bed Metarial Transport. Birikundavyi, S., Labib, R., T. Trung, H., and Rousselle, J. (2002). Performance of Neural Networks in Daily Streamflow Forecasting. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering - J HYDROL ENG. Broomhead, D. S., and Lowe, D. G. (1988). “Multivariable Functional Interpolation and Adaptive Networks.” Complex Systems, 2, 321–355.
  4. Cigizoglu, H. K. (2003a). “Incorporation of ARMA models into flow forecasting by artificial neural networks.” Environmetrics, 14(4), 417–427.
  5. Cigizoglu, H. K. (2003b). “Estimation and forecasting of daily suspended sediment data by multi-layer perceptrons.” Advances in Water Resources, 27(2), 185–195.
  6. Cigizoglu, H. K. (2003c). “Estimation, forecasting and extrapolation of river flows by artificial neural networks.” Hydrological Sciences Journal, 48(3), 349–362.
  7. Cigizoglu, H. K. (2004). “Discussion of ‘Performance of Neural Networks in Daily Streamflow Forecasting’ by S. Birikundavyi, R. Labib, H. T. Trung, and J. Rousselle.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, 9(6), 556–557.
  8. Cigizoglu, H. K., and Alp, M. (2004). “Rainfall-Runoff Modelling Using Three Neural Network Methods BT - Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing - ICAISC 2004.”
  9. L. Rutkowski, J. H. Siekmann, R. Tadeusiewicz, and L. A. Zadeh, eds., Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 166–171.
  10. Cigizoglu, H. K., and Kisi, O. (2005). “Flow prediction by three back propagation techniques using k-fold partitioning of neural network training data.” Nordic Hydrology, 36(1), 49–64.
  11. Dawson, C. W., and Wilby, R. L. (2001). “Hydrological modelling using artificial neural networks.” Progress in Physical Geography, 25(1), 80–108.
  12. Elshorbagy, A., and Simonovic, S. (2002). Estimation of missing streamflow data using principles of chaos theory. Journal of Hydrology