You are on page 1of 98

GUÍA PARA LA SELECCIÓN

DEL COEFICIENTE DE
RUGOSIDAD DE MANNING EN
CAUCES NATURALES

Guía PRÁCTICA QUE TE AYUDARÁ A ESTABLECER LOS COEFICIENTES
DE RUGOSIDAD EN TUS MODELO HIDRÁULICOS

Por Jordi Oliveras

GUÍA PARA LA SELECCIÓN DEL
COEFICIENTE DE RUGOSIDAD DE
MANNING EN CAUCES NATURALES

Por Jordi Oliveras

Twitter: @hidrojing

www.hidrojing.com

Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons
Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 3.0 Unported.

Esto significa que puedes copiar, distribuir y comunicar
públicamente la obra e incluso transformar la obra.

Eso sí, con unas condiciones:

• Reconocimiento: Debes reconocer los créditos de la obra de
la manera especificada por el autor, es decir, atribuirme
la autoría original.

• No comercial: No puedes utilizar esta obra para fines
comerciales.

• Compartir bajo la misma licencia: Si alteras o transformas
esta obra, o generas una obra derivada, sólo puedes
distribuirla bajo una licencia idéntica a ésta.

¿QUÉ ENCONTRARÁS EN ESTE LIBRO?

¿Te las ves y deseas cada vez que tienes que seleccionar el coeficiente de
rugosidad de Manning en cauces naturales?

Cuando nos enfrentamos a la definición de los condicionantes hidráulicos de un
modelo hidráulico, ya sea uni o bidimensional, una de las variables que más
influyen en el comportamiento del modelo es precisamente el coeficiente de
rugosidad.

Y es que efectivamente, los que nos dedicamos a esto de la modelización
hidráulica sabemos que una ligera variación en el valor de ese parámetro
puede tener consecuencias inadvertidas en nuestros modelos.

No en vano, cuando nos ponemos a calibrar un modelo hidráulico para
contrastar la bondad de su comportamiento comparándolo con datos de
avenidas reales, el parámetro que modificamos hasta conseguirlo es
precisamente el coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning.

Por esa razón, en este e-book he querido recopilar y ofrecerte una pequeña
guía con métodos de selección de la variable estrella de la hidráulica de
canales: selección clásica por tablas, selección en función de los usos de
suelo, selección según método Cowan.

Además, como BONUS, se incluye al final dos documentos:

- Roughness Characteristics of Natural Channels (USGS, edición 1987)

- Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural
Channels and Flood Plains (USGS, edición 1989)

Quizá algunas de las cosas que explique ya las sabrás, y quizá otras no@ o
quizás ya las conozcas todas@ sea como sea, espero que la lectura de esta
pequeña guía te resulte interesante, entretenida@ y si encima te es de utilidad,
mi satisfacción será completa@

SELECCIÓN CLÁSICA POR TABLAS Y DOCUMENTOS DE REFERENCIA Afortunadamente. que además son los que el propio HEC-RAS recomienda también en sus tablas de ayuda. me voy a centrar en los valores recomendados para cauces naturales. y de cara también a la modelización. Estas relaciones se suelen encontrar fácilmente en Internet en forma de tablas@ quizá una de la más reconocidas es la que integra el conocido libro de “Hidráulica de Canales Abiertos” de Ven Te Chow. En esa tabla se recogen valores recomendados de coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning para diferentes casos como conductos cerrados y canales revestidos o dragados. y cuyos valores se recogen en la siguiente tabla: . Pero tal y cómo apunta el título de este e-book. desde hace muchos años. mucha gente ha estado estudiando y analizando diferentes situaciones de flujo obteniendo de este modo una cierta relación entre unas características físicas de cauces y márgenes y unos valores de coeficiente de Manning representativos.

.Por si no lo conoces. Este libro lo tienes como apéndice. propiedades e imagenes) de ese tramo. De todos estos te recomiendo los siguientes: . la U. ya que en él se recoge la misma información técnica y gráfica. HEC-RAS es un prestigioso software de modelización hidráulica del Cuerpo de Ingenieros del Ejército de Estados Unidos. y en él se puede encontrar documentos e informes relacionados con la selección del coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning en los que se recogen valores de n de Manning verificados y comprobados para diferentes características de cauces. En cada propuesta de valor.S. Ese software se empezó a desarrollar para estudiar el comportamiento hidráulico de los cauces de Estados Unidos. . un enlace lleva a una página con información de detalle (descricpión. Una relación de 23 características verificadas de rugosidad de cauces naturales estudiados en tramos de cauces reales. esquemas. Un libro en pdf (editado en 1967) que vendría a ser el origen de la anterior relación. dedicado a recopilar información medioambiental del mismo. Haz clic aquí para acceder a la web. En toda esta información del USGS hay un apartado específico sobre el agua. al final de este e- book. Geological Survey. y precisamente en ese país existe un organismo. pero esta vez de hasta un total de 50 cauces del territorio norteamericano.

SELECCIÓN EN FUNCIÓN DE LOS USOS DE SUELO Hoy en día tenemos una mayor accesibilidad a información cartográfica y territorial. coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning se recoge en unas tablas incluídas en la Guía Metodológica para el desarrollo del Sistema Nacional de Cartografía de Zonas Inundables. El primero está realizado a una escala de referencia 1:25. una relación entre los usos del suelo y los coeficientes de rugosidad de Manning que los representan. Añadiendo algunas tipologías de coberturas del propio SIOSE que no aparecen en la tabla . disponemos de unas mayores y más potentes tecnologías y herramientas que mejoran y optimizan la generación de modelos hidráulicos. A continuación te adjunto esas tablas@ verás que en la parte de la tabla correspondiente al uso de suelo según SIOSE hay mis anotaciones en lápiz que intentan completar esa información: . Indicando el código SIOSE correspondiente a cada descripción o nombre del uso Comentar que esta información está referida al territorio español. De aquí que hayan surgido propuestas de definición de parámetros clásicos adaptados a las nuevas fuentes de información@ y los coeficientes de rugosidad de Manning no han sido una excepción.000 y el segundo a una escala 1:100. Esta relación uso de suelo vs. con lo que en países de la Unión Europea o del resto del mundo. Esto significa que la variabilidad de tipos de suelo para una misma zona será mayor en el SIOSE que en el CORINE. según dos tipos de clasificación: SIOSE (Sistema de información sobre Ocupación del Suelo de España. Se ha establecido en este sentido. de la Agencia Europea del MEdioambiente).000. la definición de rugosidades de Manning deberá basarse en otras fuentes de información. . de la Dirección General del Instituto Geográfico Nacional) y CORINE (CoORdination of INformation of the Environment. o simplemente en la definición tradicional según las características del terreno.

.

.

.

.

.

Pero@ ¿cómo seleccionar el coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning en cauces naturales@ si tu cauce no está en las tablas? Por ello es importante entender los factores que afectan el valor n para adquirir un conocimiento básico del problema y disminuir la incertidumbre@ Y si nos centramos en los cauces naturales los factores que más influencia tienen en la determinación del valor de la n de Manning son: el tipo y tamaño de los materiales que lo componen y las características morfológicas del mismo. n3 = un valor que implementa el efecto de obstrucciones en canal principal y en llanura de inundación n4 = un valor que incorpora el efecto de presencia de vegetación tanto en canal principal como en llanura de inundación . Teniendo en cuenta estos condicionantes. Para llanuras de inundación este valor se considera 0. que sirve tanto para la caracterización de resistencia al paso del flujo en cauce principal como en llanuras de inundación. el valor del coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning n depende de: nb = un valor base de n para un cauce recto. esos valores responden a unas características muy concretas que seguramente presentarán similitudes con las que tiene el cauce que debes modelizar@ pero al final cada caso es único. El método de Cowan o multiparamétrico. disponemos de un método de obtención del valor del coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning. en 1956. contrastados y tabulados es realmente de mucha ayuda@ pero claro. La expresión es la siguiente: En esta expresión. Cowan. verificados. SELECCIÓN POR EL MÉTODO COWAN Disponer de toda esta información previa de valores ya establecidos. uniforme y liso en función del material del fondo del lecho / para una llanura de inundación con suelo sin vegetación n1 = factor de corrección para implementar el efecto de las irregularidades superficiales tanto en canal principal como en llanura de inundación n2 = un valor que añade las variaciones de forma y tamaño de la sección del cauce. desarrolló una expresión que permite determinar el valor del coeficiente de Manning a través de la interacción de diferentes parámetros que permiten describir o valorar características concretas de un curso fluvial.

con este método. . Esta tabla de correlación de la Guía Metodológica. La Guía Metodológica para el desarrollo del Sistema Nacional de Cartografía de Zonas Inundables. a éste se le van añadiendo valores que representan la presencia de elementos y características que condicionan el paso del flujo. Así. que se basa en el documento “Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains (USGS)” se ciñe únicamente a la caracterización de la rugosidad en el lecho del cauce. m = un factor corrector que implementa la sinuosidad del cauce. en su Anejo VI presenta una tabla que relaciona cada uno de los anteriores parámetros con unos valores o intervalos de valores en función de las características que presentan cada uno de los aspectos goemorfológicos expuestos anteriormente. uniforme y liso de un material dado al cual le corresponde un valor de coeficiente de rugosidad de Manning determinado. partiendo de un canal teórico recto. Para llanuras de inundación este valor se considera 1.

cantos rodados. El primero es aquel cuyo lecho es firme (de tierra. Los valores de Benson y Dalrymple implican condiciones consideradas como medias o habituales. en esa “Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains (USGS)” se efectúa una más extensa descripción de cada una de esas variables y además se recomiendan intervalos de valores no sólo para el lecho del cauce. sino también para las llanuras de inundación. . mientras que los valores de Chow tienen relación con el tramo más suave que puede darse para un material en concreto. En la siguiente tabla se recogen los valores base nb para ambos tipos de canal.Pero profundizando más en el tema. Valores base nb Se distinguen dos tipos de canal: canal estable o canal de arena. grava. guijarros. roca u hormigón) y que permanece sin cambios significativos en el ámbito del régimen de flujo previsto. Se emplea el mismo criterio para la determinación del valor base nb en el caso de las llanuras de inundación.

escombros. y la distancia entre obstrucciones. y en segundo lugar por la magnitud de esos cambios. aunque en este tramo no haya condicionantes que supondrían una modificación del valor en él. Variaciones en sección transversal (n2) El valor de la rugosidad no se ve afectado de manera significativa si las variaciones de forma y tamaño de sección transversal se producen de manera gradual y uniforme (incluso si estas variaciones son de consideración). vegetación o incremento de la sinuosidad no hará más que aumentar su rugosidad. disposición. La incidencia del efecto del cambio de tamaño en la sección depende principalmente de la cantidad de alternancias entre secciones grandes y pequeña. tocones. ondulación o presencia de elementos emergentes y raíces. piedras. En situaciones de irregularidad severa. Obstrucciones (n3) Obstrucciones tales como troncos. debe tenerse en cuenta la rugosidad en las bancadas laterales (ribera) causada por la erosión. el tamaño de la obstrucción en relación con la de la sección transversal. Chow (1959) y Benson y Dalrymple (1967) mostraron que situaciones de riberas con ondulaciones pueden incrementar los valores de n hasta 0’02. Cualquier aspecto que implique irregularidades. contracciones de sección y sinuosidad del canal de aguas bajas. La presencia de una perturbación puede implicar una variación del valor de n hasta decenas de metros aguas abajo. Las mayores variaciones de rugosidad están asociadas a alternancias en el tamaño de las secciones y giros pronunciados. y pilares de puente perturban el régimen de e implementan un incremento de la rugosidad. . y para llanuras de inundación sin vegetación. y el número. puede ser necesario que los incrementos de valor de rugosidad sean aún mayores. cambios de alineación. Factores correctores en canal principal Irregularidad (n1) En los cauces principales en los que la relación entre anchura y profundidad es pequeña. obstrucciones. La magnitud de ese incremento depende de la forma de la obstrucción.Factores correctores del coeficiente de rugosidad Los valores que se establezcan para el valor base nb son para cauces rectos con secciones muy uniformes.

media cuando está entre 1’2 y 1’5. y alta cuando supera el 1’5. Los valores de ajuste mostrados en la tabla 2 se aplican a los canales que son estrechos. Meandros (m) El grado de sinuosidad m. y no presentan vegetación en la lecho. y la alineación de la vegetación con respecto al flujo. el porcentaje de la perímetro mojado cubierto por la vegetación. Vegetación (n4) El grado de incidencia de la vegetación sobre el valor de n depende de la profundidad de flujo. si se encuentran lo suficientemente cerca pueda darse el caso que sus ámbitos de influencia se superpongan. aunque las obstrucciones sean pequeñas. En canales anchos. Cuando la velocidad de flujo es alta. Se considera la cantidad de meandros es baja cuando la sinuosidad está entre 1 y 1’2. depende de la relación entre la longitud total de canal sinuoso entre la longitud (en línea recta) del valle por el que discurre. Esto provoca que. seguramente la proporción de flujo que circule por el canal sea pequeña con respecto de la que circula por la llanura de inundación. el grado en que la vegetación es aplastada por ese calado. el máximo ajuste es de aproximadamente 0’03. los meandros pueden incrementar los valores de hasta en un 30 por ciento. Los valores de ajuste más grandes mostrados en la tabla 2 se aplican sólo en lugares donde la vegetación cubre la mayor parte de la canal. El ámbito de influencia en canales con pendientes suaves o poco empinadas puede llegar a ser de tres a cinco veces el ancho de la propia obstrucción. cuya relación profundidad/anchura es pequeña. y el ajuste máximo es de aproximadamente 0’005. El ajuste por meandros debe considerarse sólo cuando el flujo queda confinado en el canal ya que en caso de desborde. el efecto de la vegetación de ribera es pequeño. la densidad de la vegetación por debajo la línea lámina de agua en avenida. ya que su presencia afecta al régimen de flujo en una anchura considerable a ambos lados de la misma. Vegetación orientada en filas paralelas a la dirección del flujo puede tener menos efecto que las filas de vegetación que se encuentran perpendiculares al flujo. . una obstrucción incide en un ámbito de influencia mucho más grande que la propia obstrucción. Según Chow (1959). Si el canal es relativamente estrecho y presenta orillas escarpadas cubiertas por densa vegetación que se cierne sobre el canal.El efecto de las obstrucciones en el coeficiente de rugosidad depende de la velocidad del flujo.

Tabla 2. Valores correctores en canal principal .

Estos factores de rugosidad pueden ser utilizados para estimar la rugosidad de las llanuras de inundación cultivadas. y sus valores y criterios se recogen en la Tabla 3. Ree y Cuervo (1977) llevaron a cabo experimentos para determinar los factores de rugosidad de canales de tierra con pendiente suave sembrados con trigo y otros pastos. troncos. mientras que el factor por meandros es 1. encharcamientos y montículos aumentan la rugosidad de la llanura. o rocas aisladas) pero pueden estimarse a partir de lo expuesto en Tabla 3. en pastizales o matorrales con superficies de suelo irregulares o en cultivos con alineación perpendicular al flujo pueden llegar a incrementar la rugosidad en 0’02.Vegetación (n4) Los efectos de la vegetación sobre la rugosidad se basan en la observación. el factor de corrección por variación de la sección transversal es 0. . La presencia de elementos físicos como elevaciones y depresiones de la superficie.Factores correctores en llanura de inundación Los valores de rugosidad en la llanura de inundación deben determinarse de manera independiente a los del canal principal ya que las características físicas y morfológicas pueden diferir ostensiblemente entre ambas zonas. raíces expuestas. Situaciones de aguas poco profundas. zarzas. En el caso de campos abiertos y cultivos en llanuras de inundación. Irregularidad (n1) La irregularidad de la superficie de una llanura de inundación provoca un incremento de la rugosidad de la llanura de inundación. Aunque la determinación del área ocupada por troncos de árboles y otra vegetación de gran diámetro es relativamente fácil. En el caso de las llanuras. Obstrucciones (n3) Es complejo medir la contribución que tienen sobre la rugosidad algunas obstrucciones (como depósitos de escombros. la medición de la superficie ocupada por las vides bajas. hierba o cultivos es más difícil (Tabla 3). análisis y experiencia. existen varias referencias para determinar los factores de rugosidad. que enumera los valores de incremento de rugosidad para diferentes porcentajes de presencia de obstrucción .

Tabla 3. Valores correctores en canal llanuras de inundación .

JR .50 stream channels for which roughness coe cients have been determined UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.S. Click here to return to USGS publications Roughness Characteristics of Natural Channels By HARRY II . BARNES. U. WASHINGTON : 1967 . GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1849 Color photographs and descriptive data for.

CO 80225 . Director First printing 1967 Second printing 1977 Third printing 1987 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section. Secretary U .S . Geological Survey. Box 25425.S . DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL. U . Denver. Federal Center. Peck. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L .

Y. (n = 0 . (n=0 . (n = 0 . (n = 0.032)____________________________________________________________________ 54 Beaver Kill at Cooks Falls.� � Contents Page Symbols____________________________________________________________________________________ vi Abstract____________________________________________________________________________________ 1 Introduction____________________________________________________________________________ 1 Acknowledgments____________________________________________________________________ 3 Scope of report________________________________________________________________________ 3 Field investigation__________________________________________________________________ 4 Computation of reach properties and roughness coefficients__________________________________________________ 5 Formulas__________________________________________________________________________ 5 Computation procedure________________________________________________ 7 Application of roughness coefficients____________________________________ 7 Presentation of information____________________________________________________ 8 Columbia River at Vernita. Mex . Mont.036) -------------------------------------------------------.028)-----------------. (n=0 . N. Ariz.024)-----------. Mont. Ohio. (n = 0 . (n=0 . 46 Rio Chama near Chamita. (n = 0 . 22 Clark Fork above Missoula. Oreg. Tex . 14 Champlin Creek near Colorado City. 10 Indian Fork below Atwood Dam. 50 Salt River below Stewart Mountain Dam.031)-------. N.026)---------------. (n=0. Regis. 30 Esopus Creek at Coldbrook. Idaho (n=0 . 0 .027)____________________________________________________________________ 18 Clark Fork at St .032 .030) -----.030) -------------------------. (n = 0. near New Cumberland. Nebr. Idaho (n = 0 . (n = 0. Wash .Y. 42 Coeur d'Alene River near Prichard.033) ____________ 58 Clearwater River at Kamiah.030) ____________ 26 Columbia River at The Dalles.033) ______ 62 .030) ______________ 34 Salt Creek at Roca. Mont.032) -------------------------------------. 38 Blackfoot River near Ovando. N. (n=0 .

037) ____________________________________________________________________ 78 Wenatchee River at Plain.043)____________________________________________________________________ 126 Murder Creek near Monticello.041)____________________________________________________________________ 102 Middle Oconee River near Athens. (n = 0.049) ____________________ 146 Clear Creek near Golden. Wash .038) ---------------. 94 Bull Creek near Ira. Ga .038) -----------. (n = 0. (n = 0 .041 .------------------------------------------. 0 . Mont. (n = 0. (n=0 . Wash .047) -------------------------------------------------------. 0.044) ------------------------------.074) -------------------------------------------------------. Colo. 86 Spokane River at Spokane.043) ---------.045 . (n = 0. (n=0 .053 .043 . 0 .130 Provo River near Hailstone. 118 Esopus Creek at Coldbrook.050) ________________ 150 Chattahoochee River near Leaf.043)-----------.154 South Fork Clearwater River near Grangeville.158 Cache Creek near Lower Lake. Tex .097) -----. 0 .Y . (n=0 .036) ____________________________________________________________________ 70 Yakima River at Umtanum. N. (n=0 . (n = 0. Ga . 66 West Fork Bitterroot River near Conner. Wash . Oreg . (n=0 . (n = 0. (n=0 .052 . Oreg.045) -------. 0 .138 South Beaverdam Creek near Dewy Rose.C. (n = 0 .043)-------------. (n=0 . Idaho (n=0 . Ky . (n = 0 . (n=0 .051 . Wyo. 122 Grande Ronde River at La Grande. Mont. 111 .041 . Idaho (n=0 . (n = 0. N.162 iv .079) -------------------------------------------------------. Utah (n = 0 .-----------. (n=0 . 0 .042 . Ga . Ga.043) __________ 110 Catherine Creek near Union.039) -------------------------------------------. Ga .036) __________ 74 Middle Fork Vermilion River near Danville. 0.046 . 142 Deep River at Ramseur. 0.051) -----------.� � Presentation of information-Continued Page Etowah River near Dawsonville. 0 .106 Beaver Creek near Newcastle. (n=0 . Calif. (n=0 .041)____________________________ 98 Middle Fork Flathead River near Essex. Ga . 0 .037)______________ 82 Moyie River at Eastport. 114 Chiwawa River near Plain. (n=0 .041 .039 . 90 Tobesofkee Creek near Macon. Wash. 0.073)__ 134 Rolling Fork near Boston.035)-------------------------------------------.

Mama.O56) ---------------------------------------------------------.060\---------------.0571_-. 178 North Fork Cedar River near Lester. /n = O .Continued Page East Branch Ausable River at Au Sable Forks. Moot /m=0. 210 Index------------------------------------------.182 Hominy Creek at Caod}er. 190 Merced River at Happy Isles Bridge. N .C. Wash . near Yosemite. Idaho (n=0.170 Mission Creek near Cashmere.059) -------------------------------------------------------------------.174 HavvRiver near Bpnn1c4 N.O5q). (m= 0.� � � � Presentation of information. C . (n = 0. Calif. 186 Rook Creek Canal near Dnrbn.--------.075) --------------. (n==O.O65) ---------------------------------------. 206 Selected references -----------------------------------------------------------------. . 194 Pond Creek near Louisville.073)-----. /m==0 . (n==O. [o==O.06O\-. 198 Boundary Creek near PortbD}. Ky.O70\---------------.----------------------' 211 . /m==0. 202 Rock Creek near D»rby' Moot . Middle Branch Wemtficld River at Goss Heights.

Upstream velocity head minus the downstream velocity head A coefficient K Cross section conveyance L Length of reach n Coefficient of roughness Q Discharge R Hydraulic radius S Energy gradient V Average velocity .� � � � � Symbols A Area of channel cross section C Flow-resistance factor d Diameter of bed material h Water-surface elevation ha Velocity head hf Energy loss due to boundary friction Oh.

All hydraulic computations involving flow in open channels require an evaluation of the roughness characteristics of the channel . geometry. Barnes. was previously availa­ ble only in a photographic slide library in three-dimensional color. Abstract Color photographs and descriptive data are presented for 50 stream channels for which roughness coefficients have been determined . Jr . This information. Familiarity with the appearance. The ability to evaluate roughness coefficients must be developed through experience. The photographs and data contained in this report represent a wide range of channel conditions. INTRODUCTION The principal objective of this report is to present descriptive data and photographs for 50 different stream channels for which roughness coefficients have been determined . Numerous requests for copies of the slides from organi­ zations and private individuals led to the justification for the present report . One means of gaining this experience is by examin­ ing and becoming acquainted with the appearance of some typical channels whose roughness coefficients are known .S . and roughness characteristics of these channels will improve the engineer's ability to select roughness coefficients for other channels . Geo­ logical Survey during the past 15 years. In the absence of a satisfactory quantitative procedure this evaluation remains chiefly an art. . which has been accumulated by the U.� ROUGHNESS CHARACTERISTICS OF NATURAL CHANNELS By Harry H.

Geo­ logical Survey . and thus acquire a basic knowledge of the problem.S . There are no resistance diagrams or quantitative relation­ ships available similar to those used for steady flow in uniform pipes or for the frictional resistance of ships . The ability to evaluate the roughness characteristics of channels is important in the hydraulic work of the U. the selection of a roughness coefficient can be no more than a guess . it is sometimes difficult to convince either the layman or the scientist that consistently reliable roughness coefficients can be selected by trained engineers on the basis of sound judgment and experi­ ence. 1941). Furthermore. for example. the selection of roughness coefficients for natural channels remains chiefly an art . selection of the coef­ ficients is classified as an art. Consequently the ability to evaluate roughness coefficients for natural channels representing a wide range of conditions must be developed through experience. Familiarity with the geometry. the accuracy of many selections can be evaluated in exact engineering or statistical terms . At the present state of knowledge. Fortunately. and (3) to examine and become acquainted with the appearance of some typical channels whose roughness coefficients are known. This ability. All hydraulic computations involving flow in open channels require an evaluation of the roughness characteristics of the channel . appear­ ance. To the untrained beginner. namely (1) to understand the factors that affect the value of the roughness coefficient. Photographs of channels of known resistance are thus useful in estimating the roughness characteristics of similar channels . is involved in the . and different indivi­ duals obtain different results . even though the. (2) to consult a table of typical roughness coefficients for chan­ nels of various types (Woodward and Posey. The photographs and data presented in this report cover a wide range in conditions . and roughness characteristics of these channels will improve the engineer's ability to select roughness coefficients for other channels . The experience necessary for the proper selection of rough­ ness coefficients can be obtained in several ways.

W. These facts prove that present methods are sound but that there is much room for improvement .� methods (Benson and Dalrymple. 1966 . D. 1962) . Carter. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Data contained in this report represent contributions by many engineers of the U . Geological Survey . 1966) which are used in defining the peak discharge of most major floods . Sand- channel streams were not included in the report because roughness coefficients for streams of this type have been defined in terms of size of bed material and other variables (Simons and Richardson.S. R. but as yet little practical success has been achieved. Matthai. Hulsing. Dalrymple and Ben­ son. Much credit is due Hollister Johnson and Tate Dalrymple who conceived and promoted the Survey's program to verify roughness coefficients in natural channels. Bodhaine. 1966 . E. Cobb. and R. The results of these tests as reported by Bailey and Ray (1966) indicate that trained engineers can select roughness coefficients with an accuracy of plus or minus 15 percent under most conditions . For this reason the Survey maintains a program which both trains young engineers in the evaluation of channel roughness and tests the accuracy of roughness coefficients by veteran engineers . 1966 . E . A quantitative procedure for determining the roughness characteristics of channels has been the goal of research in the Survey and in other organizations for many years. 1966 . All of the stream channels are considered to be stable . The 50 sites include a wide range of hydraulic conditions from the boulder-strewn mountain stream of the western conterminous United States to the heavily vegetated flat- sloped stream of the southern conterminous United States . Stokes. The author gratefully acknowledges the advice and assist- ance of R . W. SCOPE OF REPORT Information on the geometry and roughness characteristics of 50 different stream channels is presented in the report . 3 . Smith.

FIELD INVESTIGATION Sites were selected for study after a major flood had occurred in a given region . where the material was too large to sieve. A transit-stadia survey of each reach was completed shortly after the flood . or determined from a well-defined stage-discharge relation . These samples were in general taken several years after the flood for which the roughness coefficient was determined. The procedures used in comput­ ing the value of the roughness coefficient are then described . A size description of the bed material at most of the sites was determined by sampling methods (Wolman. Photographs of the. The photographs shown in this report thus represent conditions in the reach immediately after the flood. 2 . (3) cross sections at intervals along the reach . The remainder of the report consists of the presentation of a set of data and photographs for each of the 50 sites.� The techniques used in field investigations at each site are first discussed in the report . The necessary information was obtained in this survey to plot accurately to a common datum (1) the water-surface profile as represented by high-water marks. 3 . 1954) . 4. The samples may or may not be representative of the bed material at the time of the peak . extensive flow in flood plains did not exist . Frequency distributions of bed- material size were determined by sieve analysis where the medium size of the material was less than 50 mm and. 4 . Each site met the following criteria: 1 . reach were taken during the time of the survey . Surveying techniques used in this investigation are described in detail by Benson and Dalrymple (1966) . Good high-water marks were available to define the water- surface profile at the time of the peak . A fairly uniform reach of channel was available near the gage. by measuring the inter­ mediate axis of particles selected at random from the bed surface . The flood discharge was within the channel banks-that is. (2) a plan view of the reach. The peak discharge of the flood was measured by the current-meter method.

hf = energy loss due to boundary friction in the reach . in cubic feet per second . J) (h+h. The Manning equation is _ _ 1 .). C is a factor of flow resistance . was used as the basis for computing the reach properties and roughness co­ efficients given in this report. if the energy gradient is modified to reflect only the losses due to boundary friction. R is the hydraulic radius. The Manning equation. The energy equation for a reach of nonuniform channel between sections 1 and 2 in figure 1 is (see p. in feet .� COMPUTATION OF REACH PROPERTIES AND ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS Formulas Most open-channel flow formulas can be expressed in the following general terms. 5 . For lack of a better solution. hydraulic radius. A is the cross-sectional area of the channel. in square feet . invariably found in natural channels.2 where h =elevation of the water surface at the respective sections above a common datum. = (h+hv)2+(hf)1 . hr.2+k(Ohv).486 Q' AR2/3 5112 n where n is a roughness coefficient and other variables in the equation are as defined above . The Manning equation was developed for conditions of uniform flow in which the water-surface profile and energy gradient are parallel to the streambed. and S is the energy gradient . and the area. and depth remain constant throughout the reach . = velocity head at the respective section = «V 2/ 2g . it is assumed that the equation is also valid for nonuniform reaches. one of the well-known variations of equation 1. Q=C A Rz S' (1) where Q is the discharge. .

486 (h+ ha)1-(h+hv)M-[(k Ohv) 1.2+(k Ohv)2. which is based on the same concepts and definitions as equa­ tions 2-5. In this investigation the average value of the Manning n was computed for each reach from the known discharge. .M Z1 Z2 Z2 Z3 z(M-1)ZM (k Ahv)(M-1) . The equation is applicable to a multisection reach of M cross sections which are designated 1. The mean conveyance in the reach between any two sections is computed as the geometric mean of the conveyance of the two sections .5 for expanding reaches. called conveyance and designated K. . M. The following equation. M-1. k(Ah v) = energy loss due to acceleration of velocity or deceleration of velocity in a contracting or expanding reach .-k(Ah. the water­ surface profile. The discharge equation in terms of conveyance is Q= 11 K2 S where S is the friction slope as previously defined . . was always considered to be 1 . In computing the values of n listed in this report the value of «. is computed for each cross section. The friction slope S to be used in the Manning equation is thus defined as Ah+Ah. 1 . the velocity head coefficient.2 + L2 .00.3+ . 3. and the hydraulic properties of the reach as defined by 2-17 cross sections. In using the Manning equation the quantity (1 . .-1­ n= Q ~L .) (4) S=hy L L where Ah is the difference in water-surface elevation at the two sections and L is the length of the reach. . . and k = a coefficient taken to be zero for contracting reaches and 0 .3 . 6 . +L(m-1) . was used in these computations .M] (6) where Z = AR 21' and other quantities are as previously defined.� � � Ah v =upstream velocity head minus the downstream velocity head .486/n)AR2 i 3 . 2. .

APPLICATION OF ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS The values of n presented in the report are intended for use in the Manning equation V _ 1 . The water-surface ele­ vation at each cross section was determined as the average of the water-surface elevation on each bank as taken from the water-surface profiles. The computation procedure is virtually the same as for com­ putation of discharge by the slope-area method . wetted perimeter. and top widths were tabulated. The area and wetted perimeter for each panel between given ground elevations were computed.� � � � Computation Procedure A planimetric map of each reach was developed by plotting from the notes of the field survey. The area. This pro­ cedure is described in detail by Dalrymple and Benson (1966) . The average value of n for each reach was then determined by substituting the proper quantities in equation 6. Cross sections were plotted from the field notes. and values of AR"' were computed. ground elevations. The distances between cross sections were determined from the map. depths.486 R116 C (English units) n and the value of C may then be used in the Chezy equation V=CRS . and hydraulic radius for each cross section were determined. and data on stationing. The location of all high water marks and cross sections was shown on the map . distance. The profile of the water surface through the reach was developed separately along each bank by plotting the elevation and stationing of high-water marks .486 R2/3 5112 (English units) n R2/3 S112 or V (metric units) n The value of n may be converted to values of the Chezy C by the relation = 1 .

the peak discharge measured by cur- rent-meter method. The data tabulation shows the location of the gage and a reference cross section. is presented for each reach in the following section of the report . the median bed- material size.. d o. Data for the site. PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION A four-page set consisting of channel data. are unique in that roughness coefficients were computed for both the over­ flow plain and the main channel . the date of the flood. plan sketches (not to scale) and cross sections. the peak gage height at the gage and at sec­ tion 1 during the flood. Flow in natural channels normally meets this criterion . mean depth (area/top width). These data are listed according to the magnitude of discharge . d84. The area. the computed roughness coefficient for the reach.S. The distance or length between cross sections and the fall in water surface between cross sections are also shown . top width. Each set of data is identified by the permanent gaging-station number and name used by the U. Geological Survey in publication of streamflow-records . Information for two or more peak discharges is available at some sites. Ky. hydraulic radius. and photographs.� All these equations are limited to turbulent flow in fully rough channels . Two color photographs taken immediately after the flood are shown for each reach . and the reference size for which 84 percent of the bed material is finer. the drainage area of the stream. For each of these sites the data and computations reflect the flow of the main channel . Data cor­ responding to the largest discharge appear first. a general description of the channel. and mean velocity corresponding to the water-surface elevation at the time of the peak are listed for each cross section . The position of the camera and the . At several sites a small percentage of the flow occurred in the shallow flood plain adjacent to the main channel . Rolling Fork at Boston.

which shows the direction in which the camera was pointed .--..Definition sketch of a slope-area reach. E rgy grad ient I hf+k(Ah) Water surface [hv2 Datum L PROFILE VIEW Figure 1. Plots are arranged so that the left bank appears on the reader's left. Sites are arranged according to the value of the computed roughness coefficient.rj. i "*-Section 1 -1.. The water levels shown on the cross sections correspond to the water-surface profile at the time of the peak as defined by high-water marks. .� � number of the picture are shown on the plan sketch by a pointer. The water level at the time of the peak is indicated in some of the photographs by a horizontal rod or tape. v t PLAN VIEW hvl I 1 ~ . . in ascending order. The initial station for cross sections is at the left bank. Section 2.

. 29 .600 1. Peak discharge .16 8.024. at the Richmond ferry site. Gage presently operated 50 miles upstream for station called Columbia River at Trinidad. . . approximately .- . .-e1 and is free of vegetation . . T. .650 29 .024 12-4645 . .-89.17 2. . 49. . . . Columbia River at Vernita. . . . . .2 28 . . Computed roughness coefficient.33 ft at Trinidad gage . . 13 N. .700 sq mi. . . Description of channel .28 2.7 29.49 Notes.48 3.-May 22. . Date offlood.800 26 .10 8.5 mile north of Vernita station .2 26 . .500 0 . 49. 11. The straight and steep left bank is composed of cemented cobbles and gravel. Section 1 is 5.-48 . .000 cfs.000 1. . . . 2. 47. 0 . .� � � n = 0 .000 ft upstream from cableway at Vernita gage . Gage height. Drainage area. . Gage location . .500 ..100 1. . .5 ft (different datum) at section 1 . .-Bed consists of slime-covered cobbles and gravel . . . . . 1949 . . . . . The gently sloping right bank consists of cobbles set in gra.65 . . R. -Manning n=0. . Wash.-In sec. 24 E.760 28 .56 8. Wash. . . .-406. Reach properties Top Mean Hydraulic Mean Length (ft) Fall (ft) Section Area width depth radius velocity between between (sq ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft per sec) sections sections 1 .

Columbia River at Vernita.024 CROSS SECTIONS Plan sketch and cross sections. n = 0. . Wash.

n = 0. Columbia River at Vernita.024 No. 67 upstream from top of bank at section 3. 12 . Wash.

Columbia River at Vernita. 13 .024 No . Wash . 66 upstream along right bank from section 3. n = 0.

on left bank 500 ft downstream from Atwood Dam. .05 Notes. 280 52 5.-May 11. Gage height .. .. 2. 1. near NewCumberland.. Description of channel . T. .99 ft at section 1 . . . .4 4. 9. in SEY4 sec. . .76 202 .. . .026 3-1215 .27 ft at gage . . . . 15 N. .87 2. .82 2.026 . 279 52 5.4 4 . .- . Reach Properties Section I Area (sq ft) Top width (ft) Mean depth (ft) Hydraulic radius (ft) Mean velocity Length (ft) between Fall (ft) between (ft per sec) sections sections .-Lat 40° 31'30". Sec­ tion 1 is about 300 ft downstream from gage . Banks are clear except for short grass and exposed tree roots in some places. -Manning n=0.-Bed and banks are composed of clay.� n = 0. . long 81°17'20".. Date of food.. . Ohio Gage location.08 3. .82 257 0. . .4 4. Computed roughness coefficient.3 sq mi. Indian Fork below Atwood Dam. .-768 cfs. Drainage area. Peak discharge . R. . 28.. 273 51 5. and 1 . . . .5 miles southeast of New Cumberland. . .5 mile upstream from mouth.-10. . ..97 2. . . 1948 . Tuscarawas County. . . .74 . 7 W. . ... 0 .-70 .

Ohio.026 CROSS SECTIONS 12 10 8 6 4 2 10 8 6 4 2 10 8 6 4 2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 WIDTH. IN FEET Plan sketch and cross sections. Indian Fork below Atwood Dam. n = 0. near New Cumberland. 15 .

026 No. 16 . near New Cumberland. Ohio. Indian Fork below Atwood Dam. 327 upstream from right bank below section 3.n = 0.

Ohio. Indian Fork below Atwood Dam. 17 . n = 0.026 No. 329 upstream from right bank at section 2. near New Cumberland.

. . . . Drainage area. .4 4.8 4. . . . . . . .027 8-1235 .20 6. and 5 . . . Date off ood.-2. . Section 2 is 350 ft downstream from gage . Computed roughness coefficient. . Champlin Creek near Colorado City. . .-May 17. . 412 85 4. Banks are covered with grass and have a few outcrops . . . . -Manning n=0. Description of channel.� n = 0.96 176 0. . . . .-Bed consists of gravel deposits over smooth to rough rock. 3.24 ft at section 2 . Tex. 4 .43 4. . . 307 70 4.4 4.390 cfs.71 5 . Mitchell County. Gage height.71 Notes. . . .80 . .24 7. 5 miles southeast of Colorado City. . . . . .- . long 100°49'. Gage location . 1949 .05 ft at gage .5 miles upstream from mouth .-5 . on right bank 600 ft downstream from South Fork. .78 148 . . . 344 79 4. . Reach properties Top Mean Hydraulic Mean Length (ft) Fall (ft) Section Area width depth radius velocity between between (sq ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft per s°_ "7) sections sections 2.027 . .-158 sq mi . . Peak discharge. .-Lat 32°19'. .

19 . Tex . n = 0. Champlin Creek near Colorado City.027 CROSS SECTIONS a0 W a H W W Z _Z Z 0 J W Plan sketch and cross sections.

Tex. Champlin Creek near Colorado City. 20 .n = 0.027 No. 511 downstream along right bank from above section 2.

n = 0.027

No. 512 upstream along left bank from below section 4,
Champlin Creek near Colorado City, Tex.
21

n = 0.028

12-3 545 . Clark Fork at St. Regis, Mont.

Gage location .-Lat 47 ° 18'05", long 115 ° 05'15", in center of
SW Y4 sec. 19, T. 18 N., R. 27 W., on left bank at St. Regis,
0.5 mile downstream from St. Regis River. Section 1 is
660 ft upstream from gage .
Drainage area.-10,709 sq mi .
Date offlood.-May 24, 1948 .
Gage height.-19 .96 ft at gage ; 20.42 ft at section 1 .
Peak discharge .-68,900 cfs.
Computed roughness coefficient.-Manning n = 0.028 .
Description of channel .-Bed consists of well-rounded boulders ;
d5o =135 mm, d84 = 205 mm. Banks are composed of gravel
and boulders, and have tree and brush cover.
Reach properties

Top Mean Hydraulic Mean Length (ft) Fall (ft)
Section Area width depth radius velocity between between
(sq ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft per sec) sections sections

1 . . . . . . . . . . . 6,860 404 16 .98 16 .70 10 .04 . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. . . . . . . . . . . 6,976 429 16 .26 16 .04 9.88 755 0.555
3. . . . . . . . . . . 7,194 454 15 .85 15 .64 9.58 438 .32

Notes.-

n = 0.028

CROSS SECTIONS

a
0
W

a 20

H
W
W 10
W
Z
Z

a
W
J
W

Plan sketch and cross sections, Clark Fork at St. Regis, Mont.

23

n = 0. Regis.028 No. Mont. 22 downstream along right bank from section 2. Clark Fork at St. 24 .

028 No. Clark Fork at St . Mont. 25 . n = 0. 23 upstream along left bank from section 2. Regis.

long 113° 55'40".-13 ..15 . Gage height.030.-Bed is composed of sand. 3. Clark Fork above Missoula. . Drainage area.798 312 12 .96 12 . . 1948 . . . . Date offlood.. .500 cfs . . .. d5o =175 mm.17 11 .10 8 . 2.-31... d84 = 325 mm . ...10 305 0 . Computed roughness coefficient. .-May 23. 3. . .. . 3.24 8 . Gage location .. 13 N.-5. .n = 0 . in NWY4NWj sec .25 4. - . . . .18 Notes. 14 .-Lat 46°52'40".64 9 . . 19.07 ft at gage .. ..63 3. Peak discharge. Mont. . and boulders .56 13 .. 3. .. Reach Properties Top Mean Hydraulic Mean Length (ft) Fall (ft) Section Area width depth radius velocity between between (sq ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft per sec) sections sections 1 . . . . gravel..54 ft at section 1 . .. . .866 285 13 . ..999 sq mi . Section 1 is 405 ft upstream from gage . on right bank 3 miles down- stream from Blackfoot River and 3 miles east of Missoula .634 294 12 ... T .. . 18 W. . . . -Manning n = 0. . Description of channel. R. . . .36 12 .95 8 .030 12-3405 . .29 297 .67 243 .461 267 12 . Thick undergrowth is along right bank and along the left bank in the lower part of the reach.

Mont . Clark Fork above Missoula. 27 . IN FEET Plan sketch and cross sections.030 PLAN SKETCH 2 /1 3 4 Gage I 2 CROSS SECTIONS a 0 W a 0 W W z z 0 a W J W WIDTH.� n = 0.

28 . 18 downstream along left bank from above section 3. Clark Fork above Missoula.n = 0.030 No. Mont.

n = 0. 29 .030 No. Mont. 19 downstream through reach from bridge 400 ft above section 1. Clark Fork above Missoula.

Federal Highway Administration .Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2339 Prepared in cooperation with the United States Department of Transportation.

JR. Federal Highway Administration A guide presenting step-by-step procedures for selecting Manning's roughness coefficient.Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains By GEORGE J. for natural channels and flood plains. ARCEMENT. and VERNE R. SCHNEIDER Prepared in cooperation with the U.. Department of Transportation.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2339 . n. Photographs of flood-plain segments can be used for comparison with similar flood plains to aid in assigning n values U.S.

I.S. Series: U. Box 25425.S. Channels (Hydraulic engineering). Federal Center. CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Arcement. : I 19. or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.S. II. Guide for selecting Manning's roughness coefficients for natural channels and flood plains. V. Supt. V. Director Any use of trade. (Water-supply paper / United States Geological Survey . R.13:2339 1. Title: Manning's roughness coefficients for natural channels and flood plains. Federal Highway Administration. Federal Highway Administration.A67 1989 627'. III. 3. United States. no. Jr.S. Title. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. product.. 2339) "Prepared in cooperation with U. U. of Docs. 2339. IV. Secretary U. Geo- logical Survey water-supply paper . Schneider. TC175.4 88-600129 . Denver. Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1989 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN. Geological Survey. 2. Peck." Bibliography: p. Department of Transportation. Flood plains. Frictional resis- tance (Hydrodynamics). George J.

Chart of example measurement of vegetation density showing tree diameter and location in representative sample area 12 Contents III . wooded flood plains 10 5. Graph showing relation of stream power and median grain size to flow regime 5 3.CONTENTS Abstract 1 Introduction 1 Methods 2 Channel n Values 2 Base n Values (nb) for Channels 2 Adjustment Factors for Channel n Values 6 Irregularity (HJ) 6 Variation in Channel Cross Section («2) 6 Obstructions (n3) 6 Vegetation («4) 6 Meandering (m) 8 Rood-Plain n Values 8 Modified Channel Method 8 Adjustment Factors for Flood-Plain n Values 8 Surface Irregularities (HJ) 8 Obstructions («3) 8 Vegetation (n4) 8 Vegetation-Density Method 9 Techniques for Determining Vegetation Density 9 Indirect Technique 10 Direct Technique 10 Photographs of Flood Plains 13 Procedures for Assigning n Values 28 Steps for Assigning n Values 28 Reach Subdivision (Steps 1 and 2) 28 Channel Roughness (Steps 3-13) 28 Rood-Plain Roughness (Steps 14-23) 29 Examples of Procedures for Determining n Values 32 Summary 32 References Cited 37 FIGURES 1. Diagram of a schematic and cross sections of a hypothetical reach of a channel and flood plain showing subdivisions used in assigning n values 3 2. Graph showing effective-drag coefficient for verified n values versus the hydraulic radius of wide. Diagram showing forms of bed roughness in sand-bed channels 5 4.

500 ft east of area shown in figure 19. Outline and example of procedures for determining n values for a hypothetical channel and adjoining flood plain 35 METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS For readers who wish to convert measurements from the inch-pound system of units to the metric system of units. Vegd=0. Vegd=0.QQSl 21 15. Vegd =0. Vegd=O. Vegd=0. Vegd=O. Vegd=0. La. 6-20. Miss.3048 meter (m) foot per second (ft/s) .0015 15 9.. Miss. the conversion factors are listed below: Multiply inch-pound unit By To obtain metric unit cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0. Ala. Coldwater River near Red Banks. 0082 19 13. Sixmile Creek near Sugartown. Adjustment values for factors that affect the roughness of flood plains 9 4.3048 meter per second (m/s) foot per square second (ft/s2) .OU5 27 21. Yockanookany River near Thomastown.) 25. La.882 kilograms per square meter (km/m2) IV Contents . Vegd=0.OOS5 22 16.0090 18 12..0l\5 26 20. V<?^=0.3048 meter per square second (m/s2) inch (in. La. 500 ft east of area shown in figure 12.. Miss.0102 23 17. Tenmile Creek near Elizabeth... Miss...0012 16 10. V<?grf=0. Cypress Creek near Downsville.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s) foot (ft) . La.0929 square meter (m2) pounds per square foot (lb/ft2) 4.QQS2 20 14. La.. Vegd =O.OOS4 25 19. Miss. Base values of Manning's n 4 2. Bayou de Loutre near Farmerville.40 millimeter (mm) square foot (ft2 ) . Yockanookany River near Thomastown. Pea Creek near Louisville. Ala. Vegrf=0... La. Miss...0067 13 7.. Bayou de Loutre near Farmerville. Thompson Creek near Clara.. La.. Flow chart of procedures for assigning n values 30 22.0061 14 8. Vegd =O. Adjustment values for factors that affect the roughness of a channel 7 3. Sample form for computing n values 33 TABLES 1. Vegd =O. Pea Creek near Louisville. Vegd=0. Photographs showing flood plains having verified n values: 6. Flagon Bayou near Libuse.0067 24 18. Coldwater River near Red Banks. Thompson Creek near Clara.0011 17 11. Bayou de Loutre near Farmerville.

V Mean velocity of flow (ft/s). m Correction factor for meandering of channel or flood plain. Sw Slope of water-surface profile (ft/ft). including boundary and vegetation effects (ft176). g Gravitational constant (ft/s2). % Base value of n for the surface material of the channel or flood plain (ft1/6). The total frontal area of vegetation blocking the flow (ft2). SA.GLOSSARY A Cross-sectional area of flow (ft2). Se Slope of energy-grade line (ft/ft). C* Effective drag coefficient for vegetation. Ve8d Vegetation density (ft" 1 ). R Hydraulic radius (ft). n4 Value of n for vegetation (ft1/6). ^ Value of n. Vegr Vegetation resistivity (ft~ l ). / Length of representative sample area (ft). excluding the effect of vegetation (ft176). w Width of representative sample area (ft). h Height of water on flood plain (ft). "Zrijdj Summation of number of trees in a sample area multiplied by tree diameter (ft). SP Stream power ((ft-lb/s)/ft2).. n4 ' Value of n used in determining n0 . Contents . representing vegetation not accounted for in vegetation density (ft 176). n2 Value of n for variations in shape and size of channel or flood plain (ft176). n Manning's roughness coefficient. dS4 Particle diameter that equals or exceeds that of 84 percent of the particles (ft). K Conveyance of a channel section (ft3/s). nl Value of n for the effect of surface irregularity (ft1/6). L Length of channel reach being considered (ft). % Value of n for obstructions (ft 176).

less has insurance studies. Roughness flood plain. The step-by-step procedures described in this guide ^1486^2/3. in feet per second. and Streeter (1971). in feet. are found in Chow determined by measuring the vegetation density of the (1959).486-AR2/3 (2) values for roughness coefficients in channels and flood plains. Henderson (1966). for which are typically very different from those for Manning's formula is channels. Conveyance is defined as ness coefficients as either an arbitrary or an intuitive process. Two methods also are presented to determine the second. similar Introduction . in feet per foot. The /? value for this type of flood plain can be ing to factors that affect roughness. characteristics of natural channels are given by Barnes Photographs of flood-plain segments where n values (1967). vines. in particular. and Verne R. in flood. very n= Manning's roughness coefficient. Aldridge and Garrett (1973) attempted to systematize Se = slope of energy grade line. and the selection of roughness coefficients for Arizona streams. and Suggested values for Manning's n. Although much Manning's formula. tabulated accord- brush. The n values are used to where compute the flow information needed by engineers in the V=mean velocity of flow. known as the conveyance of the channel from the values of the factors that affect the roughness of section. R = hydraulic radius. in square feet. It would be impractical in this guide to record all that is known about the selection of the Manning's roughness INTRODUCTION coefficient. and in the design of bridges and high. for open-channel flow (Carter and others. In this guide. Arcement. the major roughness is caused by trees. ning's formula. R= hydraulic radius. using a conveyance term is sometimes There is a tendency to regard the selection of rough- convenient.. to describe procedures for the selection of When many calculations are necessary in using Man. Chow (1959).1/2 (1) outline methods for determining Manning's n values for natural channels and flood plains. to aid in assigning n values to similar flood plains. roughness coefficients of flood plains. One method. an indirect computation of streamflow. is a measure of the carrying capacity of the channel channels and flood plains. little has been done concerning the roughness values for densely vegetated flood plains. coefficients ways across flood plains. and ning's roughness coefficient. The results of (1967). plains. Roughness coefficients represent the resistance to Three publications that augment this guide are Barnes flood flows in channels and flood plains. we attempt to broaden the scope of that work. 1963). Barnes presents photographs and cross sections of have been verified can be used as a comparison standard typical rivers and creeks and their respective n values. Although much research has been done on Man. The n values for channels are determined by where evaluating the effects of certain roughness factors in the K= conveyance of the channel. Jr. design of highways that cross these environments. and Ree (1954). Schneider Abstract A = cross-sectional area of channel. Specific procedures can be used to determine the K=-1. been done for densely vegetated flood plains. n. The n value is determined The term K. research has been done to determine roughness coefficients have applications in flood-plain management. roughness coefficients for densely vegetated flood plains. in cubic feet per channels. but many textbooks and technique manuals contain discussions of the factors involved in the selection. for stream channels. n=Manning's roughness coefficient.Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains By George J. in feet. In densely vegetated flood section.

described herein apply to the selection of roughness coef. ficients for each subsection. Cowan (1956) developed a procedure irregular shape typical of many natural channels. a base roughness (nb) is assigned to the flood densely wooded flood plains. The values are intended mostly for use in the energy equation as applied to one- dimensional. Cross sections are typically divided into sub. Instead. CHANNEL n VALUES The roughness coefficients apply to a longitudinal reach of channel and (or) flood plain. open-channel flow. the slope of the A stable channel is defined as a channel in which the energy grade line is assumed to be the same for each of the bed is composed of firm soil. throughout most of the range in flow. p. and There are several means of compositing the results to m =a correction factor for meandering of the channel. base value of n for a straight. the channel must be classified as a stable (3) the total discharge of the flow is equal to the sum of the channel or as a sand channel. flow event. However. n. The cross channel n values are (1) the type and size of the materials section of the reach may be of regular geometric shape that compose the bed and banks of the channel and (2) the (such as triangular.to that for channel roughness. The different from values for channels. are computed by employing assumption from Aldridge and Garrett. the field surveys. «3 =a value for obstructions. the subsection conveyances. dimensional. In some cases. Floods often occur during the winter when there is less vegetation. including photographs. especially value of n for a channel. . /ij =a correction factor for the effect of surface irregu- tions should reflect representative conditions in the reach larities. trapezoidal. pasture or flood plain and main channel. The value of n may be computed during floods. As in the computation of channel second method is particularly suited to handle roughness for roughness. discharges of the subdivided areas. summarized by Chow (1959. 1973) lists base nb values for 3 to obtain the total conveyance for the cross section. gravel. The base values of 2 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . The must be placed on n values that have been verified. flood plains that have unknown n values. or semicircular) or of an shape of the channel. such as at the juncture of dense woods and channel in natural materials. These procedures. cobbles. such as in a slope-area or step-backwater procedure for determining flow. Such cross sections may be termed compound channels. smooth changes occur. where sections at points where major roughness or geometric nb =a. rather than only at the cross section. roughness other method involves the evaluation of the vegetation values for flood plains should be determined independently density of the flood plain to determine the n value. reliance for anticipated conditions at the time of a future event. Roughness coefficients «2 =a value for variations in shape and size of the are determined for each subsection. This from channel values. The flow for estimating the effects of these factors to determine the may be confined to one or more channels. may be coefficient may be needed to account for these seasonal assigned for conditions that exist at the time of a specific changes. obtain an equivalent n value for a stream cross section. the flow may occur both in the channel and by in the flood plain. or subsections. cross-sectional geometry and discharge values. A procedures described in this report are limited to the verified n value is one that has been computed from known selection of roughness coefficients for application to one. A hypothetical reach The most important factors that affect the selection of of a channel and flood plain is shown in figure 1. for average conditions over a range in stage. Photographs of flood plains plain. therefore. involves the evaluation of the Roughness values for flood plains can be quite effects of certain roughness factors in the flood plain. boulders. Table 1 (modified which are additive. and the procedures channel cross section. n4 =a value for vegetation and flow conditions. A variable roughness Values of the roughness coefficient. and subsections. subsec. open-channel flow. Seasonal variability of roughness coefficients should be considered. or In developing the ability to assign n values. Also. (2) the total force resisting the flow is equal to the sum of In the selection of a base n value for channel the forces resisting the flows in the subdivided areas. computing the equivalent n bedrock and the channel remains relatively unchanged value is not necessary. Thus. consisting of channel and flood-plain n=(nb +n 1 +n2 +n3 +n4)m (3) subsections. and. 136). and adjustments for various roughness factors are that have known n values are presented for comparison to made to determine the total n value for the flood plain. use each of the following three assumptions: (1) the mean Base n Values (nh) for Channels velocity in each subsection of the cross section is the same. stable channels and sand channels. may not be completed until spring when METHODS vegetation growth is more dense. uniform.

close to average. varies greatly in sand channels because the bed material Channel n Values .000' I 30' I 1.000' I oooooo oooooo CROSS SECTION ooooo 3 ooooo o Cotton o fields (Not to scale) ooooo ooooo CROSS SECTION 3 Figure 1. and flow conditions during the measurement. ft 10- 8. sand channels having roughness coefficients ranging from 0. whereas Chow's (1959) base values are color photographs of the channels were provided.024 ranges in grain size from 0. In addition to a description of the cross section. Water surface 6- 4- 20 40 60ft CROSS SECTION 1 Segments 1 2 3 80ft CROSS SECTION 2 Subsections 2 I I I I I 1. A sand channel is defined as a channel in which the Barnes (1967) cataloged verified n values for stable bed has an unlimited supply of sand. Benson and Dalrymple (1967) apply to conditions that are bed material. A schematic and cross sections of a hypothetical reach of a channel and flood plain showing subdivisions used in assigning n values. for the smoothest reach attainable for a given bed material. By definition. Resistance to flow to 0.075.062 to 2 mm.

. a check must be made to ensure that the . .. and thickness and are oriented so that regime flow. called a transitional regime flows can vary greatly and depends on the bed forms zone.. .. in feet per foot.. and Bed Straight material bed material Smooth V=mean velocity. Base values of Manning's n where [Modified from Aldridge and Garrett.026-0. the values 1... .050 Boulder .012-0. Figure 3 illustrates how the total discharge relation (fig.. which is a measure of energy transfer. Bed forms on dry beds are remnants diate diameter appears to be the most useful because this of the bed forms that existed during receding flows and may dimension is the most easy to measure in the field and to not represent flood stages..024 flows are much larger generally than the values given in .0926) R 1/6 (5) 1..025 stable channels are from verification studies. The lower regime flow occurs during low bed-form drag. Different equations are needed to describe discharges.. The choice of n values selected from Rock cut .. no data] 62= specific weight of water.. a reliable value of regime flow. Li. width. Stream power (SP) is computed by the formula: n= (0. the bed may have a plane surface and sediment length and width are parallel to the plane of the streambed. His equation using interme- waves and antidunes.. Simons. 3).S. 2)... smooth sand waves that are in phase Limerinos related n to minimum diameter (thickness) and to with the surface waves...035 experience.020 using these values.. 2. ... .020 table 1 will be influenced by personal judgment and Coarse sand .. 0.... in feet.... The computed stream power is compared with the value that is necessary to cause moves easily and takes on different configurations or bed upper regime flow (see fig.. appears between the two regimes in the depth to present at a particular time......... An unstable discontinuity. The flows that produce large enough to produce upper regime flow (an indication of the bed forms are classified as lower regime flow and upper lower regime or transitional-zone flow)...16+2. Although the base n values given in table 1 for .. (in millimeters) uniform channel2 channel1 Sand channels The values in table 1 for sand channels are for upper regime flows and are based on extensive laboratory and Sand3 . The smaller waves are known as medium-sized boulders.. The flow regime is governed by the size of the bed The equation for n using intermediate diameter is materials and the stream power.022 stream power is large enough to produce upper regime flow .....026 have a wide range because the effects of bed roughness are Stable channels and flood plains extremely difficult to separate from the effects of other Concrete . _ 0. the bed resistance in a channel varies for different bed forms... In upper length.026 (1982) give a range of n values commonly found for Cobble. The flow regime is checked by computing the velocity and stream power that correspond to the assigned n value..035 table 1 for upper regime flow.Table 1.012 . movement or long. estimate from photographs.032 . . bed shear....070 different bed forms.018 0. .3 ..6 .. 2 For indicated material. Particles have three dimensions ripples. Bed form is a function of velocity of flow. 2). The n value for a sand channel is assigned for upper 1 Benson and Dalrymple (1967)... >256 0. The n values for lower and transitional-regime Fine gravel ...017 field data obtained by the U. table 1.. These waves are known as standing intermediate diameter (width). 1966..011 roughness factors. The evaluation of n is complicated by discharge (fig.8 . /?=hydraulic radius. 2-64 0. In lower regime flow. fig. and the larger waves are known as dunes. and the upper regime flow occurs during high the bed forms. Chow (1959). 0 log (JL\ SP=62 RS^V (4) \dj 4 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains ..0 .2 0...040-0. 1-2 0. and Associates Coarse gravel . may have a plane surface and no movement of sediment.. 28).025 0. regime flow by using table 1.. which shows the relation 3 Only for upper regime flow where grain roughness is predominant. from Simons and Richard- forms. or Limerinos (1970) related n to hydraulic radius and the bed may be deformed and have small uniform waves or particle size on the basis of samples from 11 stream large irregular saw-toothed waves formed by sediment channels having bed material ranging from small gravel to moving downstream.5 ..025-0.. 1973.028-0.. Geological Survey... ... and temperature. 64-256 0. . in pounds per cubic foot.. Base n value Median size of Sw = water-surface slope. The total n value for lower and transitional- discharges.4 . according to the relation between depth and n cannot be assigned. grain son.. . in feet per second.030-0. When .. between median grain size and the n value...023 (fig... If the computed stream power is not size.

FiRel2. CT MEDIAN GRAI S C -a Q. 66 o c.QTQ 3 U> n STREAM POWER (62RS W V). gureation PER SECOND PER SQUARE FOOT 3 (/> o^» cr o. era 28). n C/) a* H 3 3J 3 m CD n> _<Q 3 T) CD CD i I 0 <Q O ZE ~3 m CD DO regilow me L IMETERS and mons . power g stmedireaman and 3 Q. IN FOOT-POUNDS O Ri19 chardson.

other than that caused by bed material. obstructions. relative to the flow. Several obstructions can create overlapping Depth of flow must be considered when selecting n values for channels. function of the flow velocity. arrangement. constrictions. When the flow velocity is The average base values of Benson and Dalrymple (1967) high. The n value decreases with increasing depth. roughness The extent to which vegetation affects n depends on caused by eroded and scalloped banks. and bridge piers disturb the flow pattern in adjusted accordingly by adding increments of roughness to the channel and increase roughness. 1967). projecting points. modified from Aldridge and Garrett (1973).02. The adjustment values given in 6 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . Chow (1959) and Benson the high-water line. and severe (table 2). nb . The value for n must be debris. and spacing of obstructions. even though the obstructions may occupy only a can be large. the n value bance. boulders. applies to upper regime flow in sand channels. roughness is associated with alternating large and small cross sections and sharp bends. The degree of the corresponding to the average base values given by Benson effect of changes in the size of the channel depends and Dalrymple (1967) shown in table 1. Vegetation (n4) Irregularity (ir. Channel irregularities. If a The effects of abrupt changes may extend downstream for measured dS4 is available or can be estimated. the roughness of a channel. that equals or exceeds The value of n is not affected significantly by the diameter of 84 percent of the particles relatively large changes in the shape and size of cross (determined from a sample of about 100 ran. and meandering increase Obstructions such as logs. appreciable. stumps. and to-side shifting of the low-water channel. The amount of increase the base value. for each condition that increases the depends on the shape of the obstruction. Rows of vegetation that parallel the Larger adjustments may be required for very large. the density of vegetation below for by fairly large adjustments. the size of the roughness. pilings. perpendicular to the flow. vegetation. A maximum increase in n of 0. Chow (1959) assigned except where the channel banks are much rougher than the adjustment values to four levels of obstruction: negligible. and the nels. align- ment. in feet. the degree to which the vegetation is and Dalrymple (1967) showed that severely eroded and flattened by high water. primarily on the number of alternations of large and small Burkham and Dawdy (1976) showed that equation 5 sections and secondarily on the magnitude of the changes. and the alignment of vegetation scalloped banks can increase n values by as much as 0. The adjustments apply to stable and sand chan.003 will result from the usual amount of channel curvature found in designed Adjustment Factors for Channel n Values channels and in the reaches of natural channels used to compute discharge (Benson and Dalrymple. the roughness-producing factors are apparent in the study reach.where Variation in Channel Cross Section (n2) R= hydraulic radius. small part of a channel cross section. Greater domly distributed particles). The nb values selected from table 1 or computed from the Limerinos equation are for straight channels of nearly Obstructions (n3) uniform cross-sectional shape. The gives ranges of adjustments for the factors that affect effect of obstructions on the roughness coefficient is a channel roughness for the prevailing channel conditions. and dS4 =the particle diameter. Likewise. obstruction. and side- Limerinos selected reaches having a minimum amount of roughness. If the depth of flow is shallow in spheres of influence and may cause considerable distur- relation to the size of the roughness elements. an obstruction exerts a sphere of influence that is from table 1 and the values computed from equation 5 apply much larger than the obstruction because the obstruction to near-average conditions and. therefore. Table 2. bed or where dense brush overhangs the low-water channel. minor. The sphere of influence for velocities that generally Chow (1959). the adjustments (from table 2) occur in channels that have gentle to moderately steep made to base values of Benson and Dalrymple (1967) slopes is about three to five times the width of the should be reduced slightly. even though none of using table 1. number.) Where the ratio of width to depth is small. the percentage of the wetted perimeter and exposed tree roots along the banks must be accounted covered by the vegetation. sections if the changes are gradual and uniform. require smaller affects the flow pattern for considerable distances on each adjustments than do the smooth-channel base values of side. equation 5 several hundred feet. irregular flow may have less effect than rows of vegetation that are banks that have projecting points. in feet. The n value for a reach below a may be used to obtain a base n for sand channels in lieu of disturbance may require adjustment. the depth of flow. obstruction in relation to that of the cross section.

Gradual 0.000 Compares to the smoothest channel attainable in a given bed material. or isolated boulders.001-0. similar to 1. cottonwood. Severe 0. jagged. Minor 0. Smaller adjustments are used for curved smooth-surfaced objects obstruction than are used for sharp-edged angular objects.050-0. brushy. («2) Alternating 0. or the space between obstructions is small enough to cause turbulence across most of the cross section. bushy willow trees about 1 year old intergrown with weeds along side slopes (all vegetation in full foliage).015 Obstructions occupy less than 15 percent of the cross-sectional area.010-0. bushy willows about 1 year old intergrown with some weeds along side slopes (all vegetation in full foliage). table 2] n value Channel conditions adjustment1 Example Smooth 0.030 Obstructions occupy from 15 to 50 percent of the cross-sectional area. logs.002-0. and the spacing between obstructions is such that the sphere of influence around one obstruction does not extend to the sphere of influence around another Effect of obstruction.2. or the main flow in channel occasionally occasionally shifts from side to side owing to changes in cross-sectional cross section shape.30 Ratio of the channel length to valley length is greater than 1. (m) Severe 1.0 to 1.004 A few scattered obstructions. variations in cross section. supple tree seedlings such as willow.001-0.010 Dense growths of flexible turf grass.000 Size and shape of channel cross sections change gradually. Negligible 0. («3) Appreciable 0. thereby blocking an equivalent part of a cross section. effect of obstructions.00 Ratio of the channel length to valley length is 1.000-0. or the main flow frequently frequently shifts from side to side owing to changes in cross-sectional shape. and irregular surfaces of channels in rock. or weeds growing where the average depth of flow is at least two times the height of the vegetation. 1973. Channel n Values . meandering2 Appreciable 1. growing along the banks.5. arrow weed. badly eroded or sloughed sides of canals or drainage channels. or the space between obstructions is small enough to cause the effects of several obstructions to be additive. Medium 0. moderately dense stemmy grass.005 Large and small cross sections alternate occasionally. Severe 0. weeds. Degree of Minor 1.020 Badly sloughed or scalloped banks of natural streams.2 to 1. or dense cattails growing along channel bottom.015 Large and small cross sections alternate frequently. vegetation Large 0.011-0.005-0.to 2-year-old willow trees in the dormant season.050 Obstructions occupy more than 50 percent of the cross-sectional area. exposed roots. that occupy less than 5 percent of the cross-sectional area. unshaped. and no significant vegetation is evident along the channel bottoms where the Amount of hydraulic radius exceeds 2 ft. Small 0. and vegetation are added to the base n value (table 1) before multiplying by the adjustment for meander.15 Ratio of the channel length to valley length is 1.020-0.to 10-year-old willow or cottonwood trees intergrown with some weeds and brush (none of the vegetation in foliage) where the hydraulic radius exceeds 2 ft.025 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is from one to two times the height of the vegetation. Variation Alternating 0. which include debris deposits.006-0. Very large 0. Degree of Moderate 0.5. or saltcedar growing where the average depth of flow is at least three times the height of the vegetation. piers. stumps.050 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is about equal to the height of the vegetation. Adjustment values for factors that affect the roughness of a channel [Modified from Aldridge and Garrett. 8.100 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is less than half the height of the vegetation. and no significant vegetation exists along channel bottoms where the hydraulic radius is greater than 2 ft. trees intergrown with weeds and brush (all vegetation in full foliage).040-0.010-0. or tree seedlings growing where the average depth of flow is from two to three times the height of the vegetation. moderately dense vegetation. Minor 0. 2 Adjustment values apply to flow confined in the channel and do not apply where downvalley flow crosses meanders. such as Bermuda.010 Compares to dredged channels having moderate to considerable bed roughness irregularity and moderately sloughed or eroded side slopes.025-0.Table 2.005 Compares to carefully dredged channels in good condition but having slightly eroded or scoured side slopes. 1 Adjustments for degree of irregularity.

the roughness value for the Meandering (m) flood plain can be determined by measuring the vegetation density of the flood plain rather than by directly estimating The degree of meandering. n2 = a value for variations in shape and size of the briars. Shallow water depths. the maximum occur in the shape of the flood plain. the data bare soil surface of the flood plain and adding adjustment can be applied to the design of any terrace. shape.2. obstructions. Ree and Crow (1977) conducted exper- m = a correction factor for sinuosity of the flood plain. the effect of bank vegetation adjustments for flood plains. and vege.5. A hummock is a low mound or ridge of earth above the level of an adjacent depression. However.0..0 to 1. Although measuring the area n l =a correction factor for the effect of surface irregu- occupied by tree trunks and large diameter vegetation is larities on the flood plain. assumed to equal 0. m. several references are available to help determine the n4 =a value for vegetation on the flood plain. the total length of the meandering channel in the reach being considered to the straight length of the channel reach. In wide channels having small depth-to-width ratios for channels in Channel n Values. and experience are used in selecting adjustment factors for the effects of where vegetation from table 3. Vegetation-Density Method. and the maximum adjustment is about 0.03. the follow- ing equation can be used to estimate n values for a flood plain: Vegetation (n4) n=(nb +n l +n2 +n3 +n4)m (6) Visual observation. The meander adjust. physical increase the n values by as much as 0. The adjustment for adjustment is about 0. The composition. marsh. The selection of an nb value is the same as outlined width. A slough is a stagnant swamp. and severe for ratios of Surface Irregularities (n. bog. In the case of open fields and cropland on flood n3 =a value for obstructions on the flood plain. Table 3 lists values of roughness for By altering Cowan's (1956) procedure that was different percentages of obstruction occurrence. The larger adjustment values meandering is assumed to be 1. By using equation 6. Obstructions (n3) The roughness contribution of some obstructions on a flood plain. sorghum. The Adjustment Factors for Flood-Plain n Values meandering is considered minor for ratios of 1. relatively easy. measuring the area occupied by low vines. If the sectional shape and size is assumed to be 0. earthen channels planted with wheat. There may be very little flow in a meander. iments to determine roughness factors for gently sloping equal to 1. developed for estimating n values for channels. increase in the roughness of the flood plain. or crops is more difficult (table 3). depends on the ratio of from table 3 (see Vegetation-Density Method). In certain cases where the roughness of the flood plain is caused by trees and brush. cannot be measured directly but must be considered. and vegetation of a flood plain can be quite different from those of a channel. plain. stumps. exposed roots. 8 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . An adjustment factor for tree trunks nb =a base value of n for the flood plain's natural bare and other measurable obstacles is described in the soil surface. The roughness factors were intended for appli- is determined by selecting a base value of nb for the natural cation in the design of diversion terraces. or they can be factors due to surface irregularity. Such physical ment should be considered only when the flow is confined factors as rises and depressions of the land surface and to the channel.02. The adjustment for cross- is small. See table 3 for n value and no vegetation on the bed. used to estimate the roughness of cultivated flood plains. lespedeza.0. grass.0.) 1.table 2 apply to constricted channels that are narrow in tation. and roughness factors.5 and greater. flood-plain cross section. flow. meanders can increase the n values by as much as 30 percent where flow Irregularity of the surface of a flood plain causes an is confined within a stream channel.2 to 1. such as debris deposits. appreciable for ratios of 1. accompanied by an irregular FLOOD-PLAIN n VALUES ground surface in pastureland or brushland and by deep Roughness values for channels and flood plains furrows perpendicular to the flow in cultivated fields. plains. or pond.005. can should be determined separately. According to Chow (1959).0 because there may be very given in table 2 apply only in places where vegetation little flow in a meandering channel when there is flood-plain covers most of the channel. The cross channel is relatively narrow and has steep banks covered by section of a flood plain is subdivided where abrupt changes dense vegetation that hangs over the channel. or isolated boulders. Modified Channel Method logs. sloughs and hummocks increase the roughness of the flood ing channel when there is flood-plain flow. the roughness value for the flood plain or grasses. judgment.

occupy less than 5 percent of the cross- obstructions sectional area. These values are helpful for compar.010 Dense growth of flexible turf grass.011-0. or heavy stand of timber with few down trees and little undergrowth where depth of flow is below branches. or mature row crops such as small vegetables. Many rises and dips or sloughs are visible. the Petryk and Bosmajian (1975) developed a method of vegetation density of the flood plain can be determined. Determining the vegetation density is an effective normal. The procedure requires a direct or indirect determination of vegetation density at a given Vegetation-Density Method depth.006-0. similar to 1.Table 3.000-0. stumps. to the flow resistance of vegeta- ing the roughness values of flood plains having similar tion. A few rises and dips or sloughs Degree of may be visible on the flood plain. exposed Effect of roots.011-0.030 Obstructions occupy from 15 to 50 percent of the cross-sectional area. or isolated boulders. as a by pasture and crops. Medium 0. Application of the flow-resistance model presented vegetation.025-0. 1973. and maximum values of n for flood plains covered way of relating plant height and density characteristics. Irregular ground surfaces in pastureland and furrows perpendicular to the flow are also included. Degree of 1. or weeds growing where the average depth of flow is at least two times the height of the vegetation. cottonwood. irregularity (n t) Moderate 0. the vegetation-density that range is necessary.000 Compares to the smoothest.025 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is from one to two times the height of the vegetation. In a wooded flood Techniques for Determining Vegetation Density plain.001-0. or supple tree seedlings such as willow.010 Has more rises and dips.to 10-year-old willow or cottonwood trees intergrown vegetation («4) with some weeds and brush (none of the vegetation in foliage) where the hydraulic radius exceeds 2 ft. Severe 0. and saltcedar (all vegetation in full foliage). which include debris deposits. (n3) Minor 0.050-0.100-0.to 2-year-old willow trees in the dormant season.005-0. or 8. Variation of flood-plain 0.0 Not applicable. Extreme 0. method can be used as an alternative to the previous method for determining n values for flood plains. or mature field crops where depth of flow is less than the height of the vegetation. flattest flood plain attainable in a given bed material. cross section ("2) Negligible 0.020-0.200 Dense bushy willow. or heavy stand of timber. or saltcedar growing where the average depth of flow is at least three times the height of the vegetation. below requires an estimate of the vegetation density as a function of depth of flow. few down trees. or moderate to dense brush. mesquite. moderately dense vegetation. depth of flow reaching branches. Adjustment values for factors that affect roughness of flood plains [Modified from Aldridge and Garrett.005 Is a flood plain slightly irregular in shape.019 Obstructions occupy less than 15 percent of the cross-sectional area. brushy.004 Few scattered obstructions. 0. where the tree diameters can be measured. If the change in n value through a range in depth is required. Sloughs and hummocks may occur. weeds.001-0.050 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is about equal to the height Amount of of the vegetation. or mature field crops where depth of flow is at least twice the height of the vegetation.100 Turf grass growing where the average depth of flow is less than half the height of the vegetation.020 Flood plain very irregular in shape. table 2] n value Flood-plain conditions Example adjustment Smooth 0. Very large 0. Appreciable 0. or moderately dense stemmy grass. function of depth of flow.0 Not applicable. then an estimation of vegetation density through For a wooded flood plain. meander (ni) Chow (1959) presents a table showing minimum. logs. Small 0. arrowweed. Minor 0. analysis of the vegetation density to determine the rough- Flood Plain n Values . or tree seedlings growing where the average depth of flow is from two to three times the height of the vegetation. such as Bermuda.

=the total frontal area of vegetation blocking the flow in the reach. cross section to represent the roughness of the cross section mined through indirect methods (Petryk and Bosmajian. versus the hydraulic radius of wide. The hydraulic radius. When flood data that include a measured discharge The vegetation density. in feet. Indirect Technique A representative-sample area must be chosen on the A vegetation resistivity value. is equal to the cross- sectional area of flow divided by the wetted perimeter. The flood plain can be divided into subsections 10 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . Vegr. an evaluation of the n value as a function of table 3 because the tree canopy will prohibit a dense flow depth can be determined. in feet per square sec- ond. the effective-drag coefficient. can be determined from for the reported flood can be determined from: the follpwing equation: Vegr (10) (9) AL d. on the surface of the flood plain. R. of the change in density can be done from pictorial or such as brush and grass. sizes in a representative-sample area. in square feet. in a wide flood plain the hydraulic radius is equal Tree trunks are major contributors to the roughness to the depth of flow. Where trees are densely wooded flood plains can be selected from figure 4. undergrowth in a densely wooded area. C* =the effective-drag coefficient for the vegetation in the direction of flow. the vegetation density can be easily a graph of effective-drag coefficient for verified n values determined by measuring the number of trees and trunk versus hydraulic radius of densely wooded flood plains. wooded flood plains. (7) 10 where n0 = Manning's boundary-roughness coefficient.49)2/^3 ' The definition of the roughness factors nb and nl The value of Vegr determined at this known depth of through «3 are the same as those in equation 6 and are flow can be used to estimate Vegr for other depths by determined by using table 3. By rearranging equation 7 and by using the (8) hydraulic radius and n value computed from the discharge measurement and an assumed WQ. IN FEET feet. hydraulic analysis can be represented by made. which could estimating the change in the density of growth. n0 . and Figure 4. physical descriptions of the vegetation. is for vegetation. Direct Technique therefore. Effective-drag coefficient for verified n values fl=the hydraulic radius. Vegd. R. exclud- ing the effect of the vegetation (a base n). An effective-drag coefficient for coefficient in a densely wooded flood plain. An estimate not be measured directly in the Vegd term. The «4 ' factor. A=the cross-sectional area of flow. and the vegetation characteristics. 2A. «0 . The n value as a function of height can be computed by using equation 7. Equation 7 gives the n value in terms of the boundary roughness. SA/AL. accurately. g=the gravitational constant. 3 4 L=the length of channel reach being considered. the vegetation resistivity The boundary roughness. and the roughness coefficients can be determined for a flood plain. can be deter. in HYDRAULIC RADIUS ( R ). C*. 1975).ness coefficient for a densely vegetated flood plain. By evaluating the The n/ factor is defined in the small to medium range in change in Vegr. the major factor. in square feet. By 16 summing the forces in the longitudinal direction of a reach and substituting in the Manning's formula. in the cross section is and depth of flow are available. they developed 14 - the following equation: O O 12 n=nQ . the hydraulic radius.

as in the sample area on the grid shown in figure 5. in feet. those numbers underlined are the diameters each subsection. The numbers n=0. The position of the tree is plotted on a grid system by measuring the distance to each tree from the center line along the 100-ft tape.025.-.0 determine the vegetation density of an area when the sample 1 1.:= summation of number of trees multiplied by tree area. XA. /=length of sample area. is determined for the flood plain by using equation 9. is determined. An effective-drag coefficient.5 4.025 l + (0. where and the depth of flow in the flood plain. C*. roughness coefficient of the cross section. h= height of water on flood plain.on the basis of geometric and (or) roughness differences in next to the dots in figure 5 are the diameters of the trees in the cross section. subsection can be determined by using equation 7 and w= width of sample area.3 1. in feet.136 Flood Plain n Values 11 . This is done easily by plotting the location and diameter of the trees.6 4. and the diameters must be measured to the 65 . 5). Each tree diameter is measured to give an 9 .9)(50)(100) The area. cross section 2. By closely The total number of trees listed by diameter are summa- examining the cross section in the field. The Vegd of the sample 149\ 2 /1 area is determined by measuring the number and diameter n=0. A 100-ft tape is 1 1. 7 . their diameter.4 1. AL hwl (2. first choose a representative sample area along the cross section.9 ft tree diameter. The boundary roughness. the vegetation density can be diameter. A sampling area 100 ft along 2 . in feet. computed by using equation 8.2 13. in the sampling area 128 0.8 the cross section by 50 ft in the flow direction is adequate to 3 1. Cross sections should be divided into subsections when changes in rough- ness properties occur. w= width of sample area.6 average diameter for the expected flow depth of the sample 8 .0 nearest 0. Equation 8 can be simplified to A value for flow depth is determined for the flood plain and is assumed to equal the hydraulic radius. and the diameter of the Vegd=^='-^Z= (2 ' 9)(57 . occupied by trees in the sampling area can be computed from the number of trees.8 sampling area is not difficult.7 3. R=2.-.5) =0. n0 . a representative. and the n value for the h = height of water on flood plain.5 6 . The sampling area must be representative of the The following table presents data from Poley Creek.3 3. in feet.8 4. Total number of trees Tree diameter in feet < . sample area can be chosen. n=n0 To compute n for a flood plain by using the direct method for vegetation density. Another way to more accurately determine the roughness coefficient is to select several Site: Poley Creek. rized.1 ft. is selected from Vegd= = (11) AL hwl figure 4.9 1. in feet. and /=length of sample area. in feet.1 1. and appropriate values for n0 . Once the vegetation .0115 tree is recorded on the grid system (see fig.1 area is representative of the flood plain.« All of the trees.0 10 . March 14. and C*.01 15)(11.4 stretched out perpendicular to the flow direction in the sample area. of the trees in feet. Every tree within 25 ft along either side of the 100-ft tape is counted.2 Determining the area occupied by trees within the 5 .3 1 1. for the flood . R. including vines. SA. in feet. The vegetation density is determined for tenths of a foot.8 must be counted. where 2/V/. in feet. h plain.0. and the n for the flood plain is computed by using equation 7.1 12. C*=11.4 3. R.0 3. of trees in the 100-ft by 50-ft area.0 area.1979 representative areas and compare the results.-=the summation of number of trees multiplied by n0 =0.

1 .3 4 >6 2*2 .1 2. .4 s> 2 2 < 1 ( 2 1 LO 0 Z 5° 1 *1 2( 1 z .* . .1 1. 1. 3> 25 1**1 1«< ' 1 .3 1 1 "X 1. 2 r2 < .1 ^2 4 2 . 1 Tl f 6 20 2. including many smaller diameter DATE: March 14.1 1 1' ' 9 1 i> 1 < .1 2 1 < 2 *1 *2 1 . " *. .2 6 *1 1 i ^ 1 Line of se ction o i' . . 3 2 2. 2 . surface is fairly smooth and has a firm soil base.2 2 7 2 1 1 3 20 -£ ( 1 6 < 1< ' 1 i i 1 ««3 4 ^7 2 ere 8* 1 .1 2 7 ! 1« . 1 1.1 1 .* 2. SITE: Poley Creek.7 .1 3 1 1. . " 1 .5 <2 sL i 3 10 o i" .6 1 v> i/1 1.7 8 i 3 .2 1 1 1< ' 2 . underlined Figure 5.. 2 1 1 2 4 >6 ' .2 1 '2 1 70 § 10 1 1* *1 ^7 « 1 1 r 1 .5 ' 4 '2.1 11 *2 1. IN FEET EXPLANATION 1.1 15 2 *4 .1 1. The 8.1 .0 1* i S3 5 < »1 z^- i *1 *1 ' 1* 1 1 *1 1 UJ *3 7 1 p o LL 1 .1 2 1 ^ 4 1 3 . cross section 2 DESCRIPTION: Flood plain consists of hardwood trees up to 40 ft tall. t . 2 H ^Hs 2.1 '7 -4 (1J 2« : v 2* Si.J . 1979 trees and some vines and ground cover. 0 &- .3 'V i 2 1 1 cI ( IP ' *1 ' 2 .0 Location of tree Tree diameter in Tree diameter in tenths of a foot feet.< .1 o 1 .1 1.22.1 i 1 .. .2 6'<1 *.3 4 3 2 < I 1 i 1 1«*1 1 i ' 1 .2 i« 1 iV 4 5 1 2 2 2 < >1 1.4 1 .' 2 5 ' s* UJ 1. »4 2.2 1 . . 25 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 FLOOD-PLAIN WIDTH.1 . 22 2J 2 .1 .1 . 15 *1 1 .1 2« I 2. Example measurement of vegetation density showing tree diameter and location in representative-sample area.

HA-603. Cypress Creek near Downsville. Information appearing with the photographs includes Aldridge and Garrett (1973) presented photographs of n value determined for the area. and C. Included with the photographs are A description of the flood plain includes values of vegeta. and base roughness. involved in assigning an n value for the site. 1979a. La. The base is firm soil and has slight surface irregularities. may be used to help estimate the roughness of flood plains tions of heavily vegetated flood plains (Schneider and planted with the type of vegetation used in their experi- others.6 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily trees. stable channels having known n values ranging from 0. Several reports present photographs of channels for Chow (1959) presented photographs of a number of which roughness coefficients are known that would be typical channels. descriptions of channel geometry and the roughness factors tion density. Ground cover and vines are negligible.0. 6-20) 0.=12. included. date of flood. including oak. cross section 3). and a tabulation of the hydraulic elements is verify n values computed by other methods. and Ming. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 2. 1974 Date of photograph: February 13. (Arcement. Ree and Crow (1977) conducted experiments to ness coefficients have been verified. n values can then be used to are given. 1977). and n0 =0. Figure 6.0067. channel conditions and the corresponding n values. gum. roughness coefficients.005. Obstructions are negligible (a few downed trees and limbs). The selected values are nt =0. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. and depth of flow on the flood plain.035.005. The coefficients for determine friction factors for earthen channels planted with these sites were determined as a part of a study on certain crops and grasses. Photographs of Flood Plains 13 . a few flood plains were included in the report.025.PHOTOGRAPHS OF FLOOD PLAINS Barnes (1967) presented photographs of natural. Vegd=0. By using these photographs for comparison ments.023 to The following series of photographs (figs.10 Date of flood: February 21. and pine.075. Photographs and brief descriptions of the vegetation with other field situations.. n3 =0. effective drag coefficient. The values that were determined computation of backwater and discharge at width constric. date selected Arizona channels and flood plains having known photograph was taken. Colson. n^O. represents densely vegetated flood plains for which rough. accompanied by brief descriptions of the helpful in determining roughness values of other areas.

025.020. The base is firm soil and is smooth. 1977. ironwood. n3 =0. The selected values are nfc=0. Obstructions are few.002. La. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. Bayou de Loutre near Farmerville.0067.8. and «0 =0. n. and ground cover and undergrowth are sparse. gum. 14 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 3. Vegd=0. cross section 2).ll Date of flood: March 18. Figure 7.003. tall trees. and pine. (Schneider and others. and C_=8.6 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily large. including oak. 1973 Date of photograph: February 14. =0.

=7.025. (Schneider and others. 1977.0075. and ironwood. gum. La. ^=0.7. including oak.002. n3 =0. Figure 8.7 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily large. tall trees. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 3.020. The base is firm soil and has slight surface irregularities and obstructions caused by downed trees and limbs. Photographs of Flood Plains 15 . and C.003. Bayou de Loutre near Farmerville. 1973 Date of photograph: February 14. and 710=0.11 Date of flood: March 18. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. The selected values are nfc =0. Ground cover and undergrowth are negligible. cross section 3). Vegd=0.

The base is firm soil and has slight surface irregularities and obstructions caused by downed trees and limbs. including oak. 1977. 1973 Date of photograph: February 14. Vegd=0. n^O. Bayou de Loutre near Farmerville. cross section 3).0. and C_=8. La.7 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily trees.003.002.025. 16 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . gum. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. n3 =0. (Schneider and others.0072. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 3. Figure 9. and n0 =0.020. ironwood. The selected values are nfc=0. and pine. Ground cover and undergrowth are negligible.11 Date of flood: March 18.

1979. cross section 2). The base is silty soil and has slight surface irregularities. Ground cover is short weeds and grass. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 3.0 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily trees. and Ming.027. Arcement. Figure 10. (Colson. The selected values are nfc =0. n. and some flood debris is present. and ironwood. Obstructions are few.0077. and C»=10. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0.11 Date of flood: February 22. and undergrowth is minimal. gum. Miss. Coldwater River near Red Banks. and 7io=0. n4'=0.2. Photographs of Flood Plains 17 .002. including oak. 1971 Date of photograph: April 5.005.020. Vegd=0. =0. HA-593.

and Ming. The selected values are nfc =0. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 3.003. Few obstructions and some flood debris are present. and ironwood. 1971 Date of photograph: April 5. Ground cover is short weeds and grass.005.6. HA-593. and C. Arcement. and undergrowth is minimal. n4'=0. Miss.=8. «w«§n^ Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. Figure 11. 18 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains .0 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily trees.11 Date of flood: February 22. including oak. gum. and no=0. cross section 2). 1979. Vegd=0.028.020.0090. The base is silty soil and has slight surface irregularities. (Colson. =0. Coldwater River near Red Banks. n.

Yockanookany River near Thomastown.OOS2. Miss. Vegd=O. 1979a. Ming. Ground cover and undergrowth are negligible.025 and rto=0. and Cf =7. (Colson.0 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily trees. Figure 12. cross section 5). Photographs of Flood Plains 19 . gum. and Arcement. and many small diameter trees (0. The selected values are nfc =0. 1969 Date of photograph: March 28. Obstructions are negligible.2 ft).025. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0.6. The base is firm soil and has slight surface irregularities.1 to 0. ironwood. including oak.12 Date of flood: April 12. HA-599. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 4.

and 0^=7. and Arcement. Obstructions are negligible (a few downed trees and limbs). Yockanookany River near Thomastown. ironwood.12 Date of flood: April 12. gum. Miss. The selected values are «6=0. and many small diameter trees (0.QOS2. Ming. Vegd=O. The base is firm soil and has slight surface irregularities.0 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is primarily trees. 500 ft east of area shown in figure 12 (Colson. cross section 5). 20 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . Figure 13. including oak. 1969 Date of photograph: March 28. HA-599.025.025 and n0 =0.6..2 ft). 1979a. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 4. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's «=0.1 to 0. Ground cover and undergrowth are negligible.

including oak. n.13 Date of flood: December?. 1971 Date of photograph: April 10. cross section 4). 1979b. The selected values are nfc=0. and ironwood. (Arcement. and w0 =0.030. HA-604. n3 =0. Colson.2 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is a mixture of large and small trees. Figure 14. Photographs of Flood Plains 21 .=0. gum.0087. Obstructions are negligi- ble (some exposed roots and small trees). Ve&. The base is firm soil and has minor surface irregularities and some rises. and C»=11.002. and Ming. Ground cover and undergrowth are negligible.003.5. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. =0. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 3. Flagon Bayou near Libuse. La.025.

Obstruc- tions are minor (downed trees and limbs and a buildup of debris).9 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is a mixture of large and small trees. n. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. 22 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . HA-608. 1979. and Arcement.14 Date of flood: December 21. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 2. The base is firm soil and has minor surface irregularities caused by rises and depressions. and «0 =0.6.0085.015.005.025. and the small amount of undergrowth is made up of small trees and vines. (Ming.005. Ala. Figure 15. n3 =0. and C«=15. =0. Colson. Pea Creek near Louisville.050. The selected values are nfc =0. and ironwood. 1972 Date of photograph: March 13. Vegd=0. n4'=0. gum. Ground cover is negligible. cross section 5). including oak.

8 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is large and small trees. Colson. and ironwood.0l02. (Ming. The selected values are nfc =0. Photographs of Flood Plains 23 . cross section 4). Vegd=0. gum. Pea Creek near Louisville.14 Date of flood: December 21. including oak. n4 '=0. n3 =0. 1972 Date of photograph: March 13. The base is firm soil and has minor surface irregularities caused by rises and depressions.6. and n0 =0.050.005. 1979.015. Obstructions are minor (downed trees and limbs and a buildup of debris). Ala. Ground cover is negligible.025. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 2. n^O. and C_=15. and Arcement.005. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. Figure 16. HA-608. and the small amount of undergrowth is made up of small trees and vines.

Ground cover is negligible. 1979c. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 4. gum. Vegd=0.15 Date of flood: December 7. Figure 17.1 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the food plain is large and small trees. and ironwood. and Ming. =0. The selected values are nfc =0. Tenmile Creek near Elizabeth. and C^=14. Obstructions are negligible (some exposed roots).030. n.4. «3 =0. The base is firm soil and has minor surface irregularities caused by rises and depressions. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. 1971 Date of photograph: April 12.003. including oak. and undergrowth is minimal. (Arcement.0067. and n0 =0. La. cross section 3).002. 24 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . HA-606.025. Colson.

025. Ground cover and undergrowth are negligible.002.0084. The base is firm soil and has moderate surface irregularities caused by rises and depressions.18 Date of flood: March 23. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. cross section 7). Vegd=0. n3 =0. ironwood. and n0 =0. Sixmile Creek near Sugartown. gum. 1977. and pine. La. Figure 18.0 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is large trees.=0. and C^IS.008. 1973 Date of photograph: April 11.035. Obstructions are negligible (a few vines). 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 5. n. The selected values are nfc =0. Photographs of Flood Plains 25 .3. (Schneider and others. including oak.

010. cross section 9). Obstructions are minor. 1979b. and n0 =0.9 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is a mixture of large and small trees. ni=0. 1971 Date of photograph: March 29.7. and the large amount of undergrowth includes vines and palmettos. n3 =0. Thompson Creek near Clara. The selected values are nfc =0.=22.. (Colson. and Arcement. Miss. Vegd=0. The base is firm soil and has minor surface irregularities.025. and C. Ming. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 2.015. gum. n4 '=0. HA-597.0ll5. Figure 19. and ironwood.20 Date of flood: March 3. Ground cover is medium.055. including oak. 26 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains .005.

Ming. Obstructions are minor (some downed trees and limbs).005.0ll5.. Miss.9 ft Description of flood plain: The vegetation of the flood plain is large and small trees. and ^=0. and Arcement. Figure 20. n4'=0.055.20 Date of flood: March 3.015. including oak. 1971 Date of photograph: March 29.010.025. The selected values are n. «3=0. 1979 Depth of flow on flood plain: 2. 500 ft east of area shown in figure 19 (Colson. Computed roughness coefficient: Manning's n=0.=22. and ironwood. 1979b.7. Vegd=0. HA-597. gum. B2=0. cross section 9). and the large amount of undergrowth includes vines and palmettos.=0. Photographs of Flood Plains 27 . Ground cover is medium. The base is firm soil and has minor surface irregularities. Thompson Creek near Clara. and C.

Look especially for evidence of bed When determining n values for a cross section. and boulders segments of the channel having different amounts of rough. Determine the channel type stable channel. 5) is used. A flow chart values. pans movement and excessive amounts of bank scour.PROCEDURES FOR ASSIGNING n VALUES representative of those that may exist during the design event being considered. should be derived by weighting values for individual Where sand is mixed with gravel. and steps 5. whereas roughness 1. cross section 2). 3. Steps 3 through which each factor is handled depends on how it combines 13 apply to channel roughness. such as debris. determine whether a base n should be assigned to throughout the reach. The procedure is adapted separate segment of the cross section. as defined in step 1. dividing the main channel is imprac- ness (see steps 4-10). whereas a vertical from the report by Aldridge and Garrett (1973) but is bank may add roughness either to the adjacent segment or to extended to include assigning n values for flood plains. Determine the factors that cause roughness and a few times. consider them in determining the median particle size of the bed material. use an average size of bed material. may be concentrated in one segment of the channel. different particle sizes or of different roughness are present. 1967). If the roughness is not uniform across the width of easy (see fig. extend through the entire reach. A form (fig. attempt to visualize the condi- The procedure involves a series of decisions that are tions that will occur. The dividing line between the cross section. compare the channel with other channels for which (fig. If the particles can be separated by screening channel. small samples of the bed material are 28 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . but the inexperienced may affect the entire cross section equally. If the to roughness. the channel constitutes the one segment 6. exist during the flow event. and 10 do not apply. If the of the procedure apply only to roughness of channels. the entire channel. the n value for cross section 1 omitted. the size Channel Roughness (Steps 3-13) corresponding to the 84th percentile should be used in the computation. Although n may be applied to scattered on the channel bottom will be accounted for by an individual cross section that is typical of a reach. For should continue with step 5. Reach Subdivision (Steps 1 and 2) Vegetation growing in a distinct segment of the channel may be assigned an n value of its own. the entire channel. Determine whether subdivision stream and should be located so as to represent the average between channel and flood plain is necessary and whether contact between types of material. or a combination and whether the conditions are according to size. throughout a channel. A gently sloping bank may constitute a apply to flood-plain roughness. bounds each segment of channel and compute the median particle size in each segment by using either method A or B (below). If the roughness is not uniform across the width of the although one of the types of bed material may not be present channel. the computation of the n values. sand A. Determine the type of material that occupies and being considered. determine where subdivision of the cross any two segments should parallel the flow lines in the section should occur. and the n value for 5. cobbles. Isolated boul- Steps for Assigning n Values ders should be considered as obstructions. The dividing line must subdivision of the channel or flood plain is also necessary. but if boulders are scattered over the entire reach. 21) illustrates the steps in the procedure (see Steps for n values have been verified or assigned by experienced Assigning n values). 22) is provided to help in personnel (see photographs in Barnes. Some factors may be change the order of the steps. If a taken into account. sidered. Experienced personnel may predominant in a particular segment of the channel. 8. If the Limerinos equation (eq. When the base value is assigned to tical. If a segment contains more than one the entire channel cross section or whether a composite n type of roughness. the reach that applies to any one section composite n is being derived from segments. otherwise step 5 should be example. Divide the channel width into segments according cross section 2 represents the roughness in reach B. n should be assigned for average conditions. If distinct. parallel banks of material of roughness is not uniform throughout the reach being con. 1. After using the procedure 4. 9. or they perform the entire operation mentally. defining the contact between the types of material is fairly 2. and steps 14 through 23 with other factors. represents the roughness in reach A. To estimate the possible range in n based on the interaction of roughness factors. in figure 1. Obstructions. and conditions do not appear to be the same as those that will other pans apply to roughness of flood plains. When two or more cross sections are being considered. The manner in user may find the form in figure 22 useful. the means of an adjustment factor that can be applied to either roughness in the reach that encompasses the section must be a segment of the channel or to the entire cross section. the user is considered to extend halfway to the next section. the user may wish to combine steps or to how each is to be taken into account. Determine the extent of stream reach to which the caused by vegetation growing only along steep banks or roughness factor will apply.

Compare the study reach with photographs of sample. The of each particle that falls directly under a node is value obtained is the composite or overall n for the channel measured and recorded. values are used. Determine the factors that cause roughness and 11. Chow's (1959) base values (table 1) are for the Flood-Plain Roughness (Steps 14-23) smoothest condition possible for a given material. Consider upstream conditions that may cause a distur. The values (table 1) of Benson and Dalrymple (1967) are for a 14. the n value selected must be straight. A decision the channel. 1. As in step 1. Select the adjustment factors from table 2 for how each is to be taken into account. nb . which is then used to compute stream personnel can make a fairly accurate estimate of the median power. Round off the n value as desired. The sizes are grouped into at reach selected in step 1. 17. event being considered. Such factors as surface conditions that influence n for the entire channel. is sufficient to cause upper regime flow. other channels found in Barnes (1967) and Chow (1959) to In the above sampling methods. ity. Use curve derived by plotting particle size versus the percentage the n from step 11 in the Manning's equation (eq. flood plains for which n values have been determined (or 8. If the material is too large to be screened. There may be cases where the roughness is determined Area should be used where the depth varies considerably or by a qualitative evaluation of the roughness by using where dense brush occupies a large and distinct segment of equation 6 and the adjustment factors in table 3. A value for nb is chosen from table nos equation (eq. Compare the flood plain with other proceed to step 11. uniform channel of the indicated material and are representative of the average conditions of the reach being closer to actual field values than are those of Chow. When more than one reach is used. If a considered. The number of particles in each range is repeat steps 1-13 for each reach. Add the adjustment factors total. The particle size by inspection of the channel if the range in assigned value of n is not reliable unless the stream power particle size is small. A is proportional to the total wetted perimeter or area. If base values are computed from the Limeri. segments. Determine the base n for each segment of channel by using table 1 or equation 5 or the comparison given in step 3. Add the adjustment factors from table 2 that apply have been assigned by experienced personnel) to estimate only to individual segments of the channel. least five ranges. The width. Select the basis for weighting n for the channel in this guide and in other references. whereas vegetation can be accounted 8. A base value. the adjustment factors should be from one-half samples are combined. collected at 8 to 12 sites in the segment of the reach. the size that corre. The ple (1967). If n is being assigned for the channel as a whole. 10. for in the boundary roughness or by using the quantitative bance in the reach being studied. must be made as to which method will be used. Estimate the wetted perimeter or area for each 16. (the Limerinos method) is obtained from a distribution 13. 5) or are taken from Benson and Dalrym. proceed with representative of those that may exist during the design step 8. for the flood plain's bare soil used directly. The flow regime is determined from figure 2. subdivide the flood-plain cross sections. Weight representative sampling area is selected for each subarea of n by multiplying the n for each segment by the assigned the flood plain. If Chow's (1959) base method. If there are abrupt changes in roughness on the segment and assign a weighting factor to each segment that flood plain. Either the volume or weight of material in each the adjustment factors will depend on the relative amounts range is measured and converted to a percentage of the of roughness in the two streams. Procedures for Assigning n Values 29 . ments to the base n. When a multiply- system having 50 to 100 intersecting points or nodes per ing factor for meander is used. surface must be chosen. 7. Compare with photographs 9. Do not irregularities and obstructions can be accounted for in the include adjustment factors for any items used in steps 7 and boundary roughness. Check the flow regime for all sand channels. If n is passed through screens that divide it into at least five size assigned on the basis of a comparison with other streams. recorded and converted to a percentage of the total 12. or intermediate diameter. and the composite sample is to three-fourths as large as those given in table 2. 1) to of sample smaller than the indicated size. to the weighted n values from step 10 to derive the overall B. Experienced compute the velocity. first add the other adjust- segment is laid out. Wetted perimeter should be used also where the depth across the channel is fairly uniform. determine if the final values of n obtained in step 11 appear sponds to the 50th percentile (table 1) or the 84th percentile reasonable. the adjustment factors in table 2 may be 18. a grid n for the channel reach being considered. the possible range in n values. weighting factor. Wetted perimeter should be used for trapezoidal 15. ranges. The n value for the flood plain can be determined and V-shaped channels having banks of one material and by using the measurement of vegetation density or resistiv- beds of another material. Determine if the flood-plain conditions are composite n is being derived from segments.

b. By wetted perimeter 10a. CHANNEL ROUGHNESS © 3. 30 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . Figure 21. FLOOD-PLAIN 2. Determine the factors that cause roughness and how each will be accounted for. 13. 8. and material in each segment. Assign a base n for each segment from verification photographs. change in channel shape. including channel alignment. Estimate wetted perimeter for each 10a. fig. to the area. if applicable. determine regime from figure 2. Determine the factors that cause roughness 4. Mentally divide channel into segments so that the roughness factor within a segment is fairly uniform. Determine type and size of boundary 7. Determine type and size of bed material. formulas. or comparison with other channels and verification photographs. Flow chart of procedures for assigning n values (modified from Aldridge and Garrett. and meander. formulas. 1. Weight the n values by assigning b. The n from table 1 is valid only for the upper regime flow. Select the method for weighting n. Assign a base n from tables. 5. and estimate conditions at time of flow event. Round off as desired for use in the Manning's equation. ROUGHNESS Determine how base n will be assigned. of channel. obstructions. 12 Compare value determined with that for other channels and verification photographs to test for reasonableness. For the entire channel Assign a composite n for the entire channel. Weight the n values by assigning weighting factors that are proportional weighting factors that are proportional to the wetted perimeter. Determine extent of reach to which roughness factor will apply. tables. 9. comparison with other channels and 7. vegetation. Determine channel type. 6. Determine if and where subdivision between channel and flood plain is necessary. and how each will be accounted for. For sand channels: Check flow regime by computing velocity and stream power for the above n . derived from individual segments of the channel 4. Compare the channel with photographs and descriptions of other channels. Apply adjustment factors for individual segments. 6. 11 Adjust for factors not considered in steps 7 and 8. 1973. 3). Estimate area for each segment segment of channel.

23. 15. 1973. 18. Procedures for Assigning n Values 31 . (Following steps apply to each subdivision. fig. Figure 21. Boundary-roughness method with vegetation-density method Boundary-roughness method 20. Determine the adjustment factors from tables. 16. FLOOD-PLAIN ROUGHNESS 14. Determine type of flood plain. and estimate conditions at time of flow event. 19.) 17. Determine method to be used in assigning n to flood plain. Flow chart of procedures for assigning n values (modified from Aldridge and Garrett. Assign a base n/jfrom tables and comparison with other flood plains and verification photographs. Determine if roughness is uniform throughout flood plain. Determine n for flood plain by using formulas. Compare value determined with that for other flood plains and verification photographs to test for reasonableness. 22. or boundary-roughness factors only. 21. compare the flood plain with photographs and descriptions of other flood plains. or whether flood plain needs to be subdivided. Determine the factors that cause roughness and how each is to be accounted for. whether vegetation-density method will be used with boundary-roughness factors. 3) Continued. Determine vegetation density of representative sample area of flood plain. Determine HQ value from tables and formulas.

Steps 1 through 13 subsection. The photographs can be used for value for each segment is determined and a composite n for comparison with field situations to help verify selected n the channel is computed by weighting each segment n value values. by using woods having little undergrowth. Again. depending on which subsection. ing roughness coefficients for channels and flood plains are The flow in cross section 3 is channel and flood-plain presented in this guide. The n4 ' value is vegetation density of the woods is used to determine the n the adjustment factor for vegetation not accounted for by the value for the flood plain. C). These procedures can be used in the flow. Steps 14 through 23 in Steps for Assigning n Values are sampling area. is determined from determined by using equation 11 and measuring the cross. The cross section is divided into three subsections. and no subdivision of determined for the flood plain. There is no need to subdivide the determined by using equation 6 or 7. Determine the n0 value by equation 9. field to help assign reasonable n values for many types of Subsection 1 is flood-plain flow through woods. These steps apply only to channel condi- mined from physical measurements of the vegetation in a tions. in Steps for used to determine the total roughness of flood-plain subsec- Assigning n Values. equation 9 and the n value is determined by using equation sectional area occupied by the trees and undergrowth in the 7. By measuring two or three sampling areas in a subdivision of the channel is necessary. A Values channel and flood plain may need to be divided into subsections and n values assigned to each subsection if one A sketch of a hypothetical channel and flood plain is cross section is not representative of the entire reach. The n roughness coefficients. 3). are used in the computation of n for tions. by the wetted perimeter. plains. then an option. section is shown in figure 1. Select the adjustment factors from table 3 for 2 is channel flow. n0 . Flow in cross section 2 is also confined to the Photographs of flood plains for which n values have channel. through a cotton field. density can be determined. and reach has a cross section (1. An estimate of the depth of flow on the flood used in the computation of n for subsection 1. In subsection 1. and no the n value. 32 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains . based on the measurement of vegetation density of the flood plain. The channel and flood plain together series of decisions based on the interaction of roughness are divided into three separate reaches (A. steps 1 through 13 are used Examples and step-by-step procedures for determin- in the computation of n for cross section 2. The depth of flow is equal to the height of the method has been chosen. Steps 1 through 13. 2. Compare the study reach with photographs of SUMMARY other flood plains in this report and in other references to determine if the final values of n obtained in step 22 appear to be reasonable. A base value is assigned to the channel. Subsection 3 represents the flow of a flood plain 22. This guide presents procedures for assigning reliable n values for channels and flood plains. subsection channels and flood plains. 23. mined from a representative-sample area of the wooded 21. a more representative value for vegetation are used in the computation of n for subsection 2. A base value related to certain roughness factors is The channel is composed of firm soil. representative sample area of a flood-plain subsection. section. computed by using equation 7 and vegetation-density and boundary-roughness values for each subarea. B. and each factors. and procedures for determining n values Channel roughness is determined by following a are outlined in table 4. and (3) gravel and cobbles. the n value for each subarea of the flood plain is of the n value for subsection 3 by using equation 6. The shape of each cross adjustments are made for certain roughness factors. The n value for the flood-plain subsection is planted in cotton. shown in figure 1. The vegetation density of the sampling area is flood plain. The channel is composed of firm soil. A similar procedure is used to assign n values to flood In cross section 1. The roughness coefficient. Steps 14 through 23 are used in the computation used. (2) sand. n. The vegetation density of the flood plain is deter- cross section 1. 19. the flood plain is made up of dense 20. and subsection 3 is flood-plain flow conditions that influence roughness of the flood-plain sub. Subsection 2 of cross section 3 represents channel plain is necessary to determine the vegetation density and flow. The vegetation density is deter- vegetation-density method. The procedure using the the adjustment factors selected in step 19. is the channel is necessary. If the quantitative method is being vegetation. applies to a reach of a channel and (or) flood Examples of Procedures for Determining n plain and should be representative of that entire reach. the flow is confined to the channel. which is composed of three distinct parallel bands been established are presented to aid in the determination of of (1) bedrock. A boundary roughness.

Is roughness uniformly distributed along the cross section? Is a division between channel and flood plain necessary? (Channel roughness uses steps 3-13. 1973. fig.) Is roughness uniformly distributed across the channel? If not. Computation of weighted n for the channel Segment Approximate number dimensions. Are present conditions representative of those during the flood? If not. 2. Adjust. 4. flood-plain roughness uses steps 14-23. n should be assigned for the average condition of the reach. on what basis should n for the individual segments be weighted? 3. Is roughness uniform throughout the reach being considered? If not.Stream and location: ___________________________________________ Reach: ____________________________________________________ Event for which n is assigned: ________________________________________ 1. How will the roughness-producing effects of the following on the channel be accounted for? Bank roughness: _____________________________________________ Bedrock outcrops: _____________________________________________ Isolated boulders: _____________________________________________ Vegetation: ________________________________________________ Obstructions: Meander: 5-10. Wetted Median Base n Adjusted n Area. for (ft2) n material (ft) (mm) segment ments factor factor Width Depth Sum Weighted n = Figure 22. grain size. Describe the channel. describe the probable conditions during the flood. Summary 33 . 4). Adjusted Weight times weight and (ft) perimeter. Sample form for computing n values (modified from Aldridge and Garrett.

11-13. Computation of n for the channel
Adjustment factors for the channel
Factor Describe conditions briefly Adjustment
Irregularity, n1
Alignment, n2

Obstructions, n3

Vegetation, n4
Meander, m

Weighted n plus adjustments
Computed n =
14. Describe the flood olain.

Are present conditions representative of those during the flood?
If not, describe probable conditions during the flood.
15. Is the roughness coefficient to be determined by roughness factors only or is it to include
vegetation-density method?
16. Is roughness uniformly distributed across the flood plain?
If not, how should the flood plain be subdivided?
17-23. Computation of n for flood plain
Adjustment factors not using vegetation-density method
Base n , Irregularity, Obstructions, Vegetation,
Subsection Computed n
nb "i "3 A74

Adjustment factors using vegetation-density method
Boundary
Sub- Base n , Irregu- Obstruc- Vege- Vegetation Effective Hydraulic
roughness, Computed
section nb larity, tions, tation, n0= density, drag, radius, n
"i "3 n4
'V71 +n3+A74
Vegd c* R

Figure 22. Sample form for computing n values (modified from Aldridge and Garrett, 1973, fig. 4) Continued.

34 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains

Table 4. Outline and example of procedures for determining n values for a hypothetical channel and adjoining flood plain
[Modified from Aldridge and Garrett, 1973, table 6]

Item to be determined or operation
Step Factors on which decisions are based and the results
to be performed
CROSS SECTION 1
1 Extent of reach ....................... The reach extends one section width upstream of cross section 1 to midway between
cross sections 1 and 2. Designated as reach A (fig. 1).
2 Subdivision of cross section 1.......... Only channel flow, no overbank flood-plain flow. Assign a base nb to entire channel.
Channel roughness (steps 3-13)
3 (a) Type of channel................... A stable channel made up of firm soil.
(b) Conditions during flow event....... Assume channel conditions are representative of those that existed during the peak
flow.
(c) Comparable streams ............... None.
4 Roughness factors..................... Add adjustments for grass and trees in channel and for channel alignment.
5 Divide into segments.................. Not necessary.
6 Type of channel ...................... Firm soil.
7 Base nb .............................. Table 1 gives an nb value for firm soil of 0.020-0.032. Use 0.025.
8 Adjustment factors for segments ....... None.
9 Basis for weighting n ................. Not applicable.
10 Weighting factors and weighted n ...... Not applicable.
11 Add adjustments for entire channel..... Vegetation («4) weeds and supple seedlings along bottom of channel (table 2).
«4 =0.005. Meander is minor, m=1.00.
n (nb +n l +n2 +n3 + n4)m.
n=(0.025+0+0+0+0.005)1.00.
n=0.030.
12 Compare with other streams ........... None.
13 Check flow regime.................... Not applicable.
CROSS SECTION 2

1 Extent of reach ....................... From midway between cross sections 1 and 2 to midway between cross sections 2 and
3. Designated as reach B (fig. 1).
2 Subdivision of cross section 2.......... Flow remains in channel, no overbank flood-plain flow. The channel is composed of
distinct bands, each having a different roughness. Derive n by weighting segments.
Channel roughness (steps 3-13)
3 (a) Type of channel................... Combinations of sand and stable channel. Consider that channel reacts as a stable
channel.
(b) Conditions during flow event....... Some movement of sand may have occurred during the peak flow, but assume that
channel conditions are representative of those that existed during the peak.
(c) Comparable streams............... None.
4 Roughness factors..................... (1) Bedrock may be accounted for by adding an adjustment factor to the n value for
the bed or as a separate segment. Use latter.
(2) Divide into segments according to the type of material.
(3) Boulder at head of reach add as an adjustment factor to composite n.
5 Divide into segments.................. The channel has three basic types of roughness caused by parallel bands of bedrock,
sand, and gravel and cobbles. Each band is a segment.
6 Type of material and grain size ........ (1) Bedrock slightly irregular, containing fairly sharp projections having a maxi-
mum height of about 3 in.
(2) Sand determined by sieve analysis, median particle size is 0.8 mm.
(3) Gravel and cobbles as determined by examination, the material is from 2 to
10 in. in diameter. As determined from 100-point grid system, the median particle
size is 6 in.
7 Base nb .............................. (1) Bedrock table 1 shows that nb for jagged and irregular rock cut is from 0.035 to
0.050. Assume that the projections have an average cut; nb for this segment is
0.040.
(2) Sand table 1 gives an nb value of 0.025.
(3) Gravel and cobbles table 1 shows that the base nb for cobbles ranges from 0.030
to 0.050. The median diameter is small for the size range. Use a base nb value of
0.030.
8 Adjustment factors for segments ....... None.
9 Basis for weighting n ................. Use wetted perimeter for basis of weighting n for the channel segments.

Summary 35

Table 4. Outline and example of procedures for determining n values for a hypothetical channel and adjoining flood
plain Continued
[Modified from Aldridge and Garrett, 1973, table 6]

_ Item to be determined or operation ... . . . , . . , , , . .
Step , , , Factors on which decisions are based and the results
r to be performed

CROSS SECTION 2-Continued

10 Weighting factors and weighted n ...... About 15 ft of the wetted perimeter is bounded by bedrock, about 25 ft by sand, and
about 25 ft by gravel and cobbles. The unadjusted n value is (0.2x0.040
+0.4X0.025+0.4X0.030)71.0=0.030.
11 Add adjustments for entire channel..... (1) Boulders at head of the reach are slight obstructions, add 0.002 (table 2).
(2) The bend near the lower end of reach A (fig. 1) causes slight irregularity; add
0.002 (table 2).
n=(nb +n l +n2 +n3 +n4)m.
n=(0.030+0.002+0+0.002+0)1.0.
n=0.034.
12 Compare with other streams ........... None.
13 Check flow regime.................... Sufficient sand was not present to warrant a check.
CROSS SECTION 3

1 Extent of reach ....................... From midway between cross sections 2 and 3 to one section width down stream of
cross section 3. Designated as reach C (fig. 1).
2 Subdivision of cross section 3.......... There is overbank flood-plain flow on both sides of the channel. Subsection 1 is
flood-plain flow through trees, subsection 2 is channel flow, and subsection 3 is
flood-plain flow through a cotton field. Assign a base nb to each subsection.
Channel roughness (steps 3-13) subsection 2
3 (a) Type of channel................... A stable channel made up of firm soil.
(b) Conditions during flow event....... Assume channel conditions are representative of those that existed during the peak
flow.
(c) Comparable streams ............... See photographs of similar channels in Barnes (1967, p. 16-17). Channel made up of
same type of material. Barnes used n of 0.026 for the channel.
4 Roughness factors..................... Trees along the bank should be considered as obstruction («3) for the channel.
5 Divide into segments.................. Not necessary.
6 Type of material and grain size ........ Firm soil (clay).
7 Base nb .............................. Table 1 gives a base nb value for firm soil of 0.020 to 0.030. Use 0.025.
8 Adjustment factors for segments ....... None.
9 Base for weighting n .................. Not applicable.
10 Weighting factors and weighted n ...... Not applicable.
11 Add adjustments for entire channel..... Obstructions («3) negligible scattered trees and tree roots along edge of channel
banks (table 2). «3 =0.003. Meander is minor, m=1.00.
n=(nb +n l +n2 +n3 +n4)m.
n=(0.025+0+0+0.003+0)1.00.
n=0.028.
12 Compare with other streams ........... Similar to channel in photographs in Barnes (1967, p. 16-17). The n value reported
was 0.026.
13 Check flow regime.................... Not applicable.
Flood-plain roughness (steps 14-23) subsection 1 (made up of trees)
14 (a) Type of flood plain................ A slightly irregular flood plain covered with hardwood trees. No undergrowth.
(b) Conditions during flow event....... Assume present conditions are representative of those that existed during the peak
flow.
(c) Comparable flood plains ........... Rood plain is similar to one shown in figure 14 of this report.
15 Method to be used in assigning n ...... Use the vegetation-density method. Need to determine a value for boundary rough-
ness.
16 Subdivision of flood plain ............. The flood plain is uniform throughout.
17 Roughness factors..................... Trees are the major roughness factor; surface irregularity and some obstructions are on
flood plain.
18 Base nb .............................. Table 1 gives a base nb value for firm soil of 0.020-0.030. Use 0.020.
19 Adjustment factors .................... Irregularity is minor; a few rises and dips across the flood plain. n l =0.005 (table 3).
Obstructions are negligible, consisting of scattered debris, exposed roots, and
downed trees. «3 =0.004 (table 3).

36 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains

000 and 1:4.... D.. Roughness coefficients 213 p. Al..W...S.. Einstein... 17 Roughness factors.500 alluvial-channel flow: Proceedings...00... 22 n for flood plain .. n=(0.. office procedures for indirect discharge measurements: U. Use 0.. three sheets. 1973... R.....J. M.. sample area..W... Conditions are similar to flood event.. 39^40) assigned cotton fields an n value of about 0.029 n=0.. H.... HA-603. five sheets.9 ft..... p. Vegd=Q. n^O.A.... Louisiana: U.Table 4... Carter..A. n=0...000.030..Qll5. Colson. table 6] Item to be determined or operation Step Factors on which decisions are based and the results to be performed CROSS SECTION 3. (c) Comparable flood plains . 15 Method to be used in assigning n . Geo.. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1849.. and Dalrymple......E......S.... and Garrett... 18 Base nb . Creek near Downsville.. and Ming. 1967... for stream channels in Arizona: U.. Irregularity is moderate with furrows parallel to flow on flood plain. Flood plain is a cotton field in full growth. Journal of the Hydraulics Division.. 1979a... Louisiana: U.005+0+0.S..... Geological Survey Burkham.... 1:4... E.. 23 Compare with other flood plains . scale Silberman... Hinds. Arcement.040 (table 3).. n0 =0... three sheets... 1976. 20 «0 . Barnes... Roughness characteristics of natural channels: U. Hydraulics Division: Proceedings... book 3. Not applicable.. (b) Conditions during flow event..M.S... Flood-plain roughness (steps 14-23) subsection 3 (cotton field) 14 (a) Type of flood plain. HY10.. Geolog..O.. 102. Ree and Crow (1977. Outline and example of procedures for determining n values for a hypothetical channel and adjoining flood plain Contin ued [Modified from Aldridge and Garrett.08.R.. Louisiana: U.075. G.S. Julian. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investi- ter at bridges and densely wooded flood plains.. 14).... Flagon Bayou near Libuse.. Aldridge.. C. Table 1 gives a base nb value for firm earth of 0..... Geological Survey Benson.000.025+0... chap. REFERENCES CITED logical Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas...010 (table 3). Jr..No division of flood plain is necessary.... 21 Vegetation density of representative Vegd=0. B..... 1479-1489.... scales 1:24.. and Dawdy.. R=2. 23 Compare with other flood plains .. Vegetation is cotton crop. 19 Adjustment factors... 87 p..... scales 1:62. HA-606. Tenmile Creek near Elizabeth. Friction factors in open channels. 21 Vegetation density of representative Not applicable.. General field and Open-File Report.. Assign n by evaluation of boundary roughness only. n=(nb +n l +n2 +n3 +n4 +)tn.000. 1973.01+0+0+0... n0 =(0....137.. n=0. Tate... v. R. Cypress gations. Civil Engineers. and ical Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas. n4 =0....... 22 n for flood-plain subsection 1 ... Resistance equation for Hydrologic Investigations Atlas. 1967.... 16 Subdivision of flood plain ... subsection 1 Continued 20 nQ =(nb +n l +n2 +n3 +n4 ')m. American Society of and 1:2..... H. Backwater at bridges and densely wooded flood channels of the Committee on Hydromechanics of the plains.....N... 1979b..004+0)1...029. sample area.... Photographs of similar flood plains found in this report (fig. HA-604...040)1.025.. D.0.. J. American Society of References Cited 37 .020-0. 1963.. depth of flow is about equal to height of vegetation.. Backwa..S...... B...E. Backwater at bridges and densely wooded flood no... Roughness factors to be considered are surface irregularity and vegetation. p.0ll5 is an average value from three sampling areas. None... plains. Powell.....H...020+0..... 30 p.. progress report of the task force on friction factors in open 1979c.

E.. D.S. G.N. Arcement. Petryk. Mississippi: U. Analysis of Colson. and Bosmajian. Pea Creek near Book Co. Computation of backwater and dis- plains. Sylvester.S.. P.B. 1975. Schneider. HA-599. V. Friction factors for vegetated kany River near Thomastown. 89. three sheets. Backwater at bridges and densely wooded flood Druffel.E. Mississippi: U. 1979a. Geological Survey Hydrologic no. chap.T. George. Mac. three sheets. and Associates.000 and 1:8. and Arcement. Li. Alabama: U. Colson. Backwa..S. Board. R. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas. Ming. Chow.000. F. 47 p.. Handbook of channel design for soil and water and 1:8. 1979. W.. 6. Yockanoo..L. 61 p. Determination of the Manning coefficient flow in alluvial channels. Geological Survey no. Civil Engineers.M. scales 1:24.E. p. McGraw-Hill at bridges and densely wooded flood plains.O.. Associates.S.000 and 1:2. pt. Simons.R. 1:62. Coldwater River Civil Engineers.S. 1966. Investigations Atlas. HY7. nine sheets. 40 p.. 5th ed. 1977. G. plains: U. ARS-S-151..W. HA-597.000 Ree.000. C. 1966.S. 1970. conservation: Soil Conservation Service. Geological waterways of small slope: Agricultural Research Service.. Journal of the Hydraulics Division. W. 38 Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains .17.L. G. W.E. Backwater flow through vegetation: Proceedings. and 1979b.O.. charge at width constrictions of heavily vegetated flood logical Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas. B. C. Inc. 422-J. C. 1979. 1971.E. scales U.. V. V. and Ming. Simons. fluvial systems: Fort Collins. 97-143. III. Mississippi: U. Thompson Creek near Clara. American Society of at bridges and densely wooded flood plains.. Leroy. Backwater Streeter. 871-884. 56 p.. 64 p. Resistance to Limerinos. Estimating hydraulic roughness coefficients: Simons. B. HY2. Fluid mechanics: New York. no.. Ming.. and Crow.B.T. Geological Survey Professional Paper Henderson.. 705 p. Geo. p... Hydrologic Investigations Atlas. U.. D.. Department of Agriculture. Resistance to flow in Agricultural Engineering. v. 6. v. J. McGraw-Hill Book Co.000. F.O. p. p. scales 1:24.. and Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1898-B. SCS-TP-61. Open-channel hydraulics: New York. B.. tions 76-129.S.500 and 1:8.J. Cowan. 7.M.O. and Arcement. J. Li. Millan Publishing Co.000.R. near Red Banks. 680 p.S. 1977. Louisville.J.. HA-608. Open-channel flow: New York. 1... Colorado. in Engineering analysis of from measured bed roughness in natural channels: U.S. 522 p. and Richardson. 101. three sheets. alluvial channels: U.V..J.. 37. 1956. B. v. HA-593.. Department of Colson. ter at bridges and densely wooded flood plains. Colson.O. 1954. Lee. 1982. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investiga- scales 1:24.11-6. Ree. Agriculture. 473-475. 1959.