Sediment Transport 

in the Rio Grande 

New Mexico

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 462-F
Sediment Transport 

in the Rio Grande 

New Mexico

By CARL F. NORDIN, JR., and JOSEPH P. BEVERAGE

SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 462-F

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1965
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Thomas B. Nolan, Director

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 30 cents (paper cover)
CONTENTS

Glossary of terms..._____-_-_-_----___--_-___-

List of symbols.._____________________________

Abstract_ _ _________________________________

Introduction _________________________________

Purpose and scope..-_-_--_-_______-_-_-_.

Acknowledgments__ ____________________

Description of reach________________________

Basic data.__________________________________

Flow characteristics and sediment concentration. 

Hydraulic variables.______________________

Page

IV 

IV

Fl 

1

1

2

2

2

5

Page 

Transport relations___--___-_-_-___-_-_-_-_-_-___-_- Fll

Transport rates related to simple hydraulic variables. 12

Transport parameters_______-_____-----

Shear stress and effective shear stress . 

Bed-material characteristics _______

Temperature effects.____-_-___-____

Other considerations_______________

Conclusions._______----_____----_-_-_-

References cited.______________________

17

17

20

20

22

22

35

ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURE 1. Index map___..______. ______________

2. Channel profile__-_-_-_______________

3. Graph showing average size distribution 

of bed material. ___________________

4. Flow-duration curves __ _____________

5-11. Graphs:

5. Daily mean discharge and concentration, and water temperature, April through July, 

1958, Rio Grande at Otowi 

Bridge... __________________

Daily mean discharge and concentration, and water temperature, Rio Grande near Ber6.

7. Relation of slope to discharge, 

Otowi and Bernalillo. _______

8. Hydraulic geometry-discharge relations, Otowi and Bernalillo 

9. Shear-discharge relation, Otowi 

and Bernalillo. _____________

10. Discharge-C/Vi relation, Otowi 

and Bernalillo. _ ____________

11. Relation of median diameter of 

bed material to discharge, 

Otowi and Bernalillo _ _______

12. Particle-size histograms of bed 

material and suspended sedimeiit, Rio Grande at Otowi 

Bridge, July 20, 1961. .__---.

Page

F3

4

4

5

10

11

11

11

12

FIGURE 13-22. Graphs:

13. Discharges of bed material 

coarser than 0.062 mm, 0.125 

mm, and 0.250 mm, Rio 

Grade at Otowi Bridge __ ___ F13

14. Transport relations for Rio

Grande at San Felipe ________ 14

15. Relation of bed-material discharge to water discharge.... 15

16. Relation of unit bed-material 

discharge to unit water dis17.

19.

20.

Relation of unit bed-material 

discharge to mean velocity.... 

18. Relation of bed-material concentration to mean velocity .. _

Relation of unit bed-material discharge to shear, Otowi and 

Bernalillo.- __ _ __ _ __-_

Relation of unit bed-material 

discharge to effective shear, 

Otowi and Bernalillo ________

21. A dimensionless shear-transport 

relation, Otowi and Bernalillo22. Systematic changes in bed material size distribution, 1958,

Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge __

23. Plot showing apparent effect of temperature on concentration, Rio Grande

near Bernalillo___--___-____-------

15

15

15

17

18

19

21

22

in
IV

TABLE 1-6. Basic hydraulic data and measured and 

computed sediment concentrations:

1. Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, 

near San Ildefonso, N. Mex__

2. Rio Grande at Cochiti, N. Mex__

3. Rio Grande at San Felipe, N. 

Mex_______________________

4. Rio Grande near Bernalillo, N. 

Mex_ ______________________

5. Rio Grande at Albuquerque, 

N. Mex________________

6. Rio Grande near Belen, N. Mex_ 

7-12. Particle-size analyses of bed material:

7. Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, 

near San Ildefonso, N. Mex_ _ _

8. Rio Grande at Cochiti, N. Mex_

CONTENTS

TABLES

Page 

F23

24

25

26

27

28

28

29

TABLE 7-12 Continued

9. Rio Grande at San Felipe, Page 

N. Mex_____________ F30

10. Rio Grande near Bernalillo,

N. Mex__ _______ ___ 31

11. Rio Grande at Albuquerque,

N. Mex__________-. 32

12. Rio Grande near Belen, N. Mex_ 33

13. Sources of published particle-size analyses of suspended sediment used in the 

modified Einstein calculations_______ 33

14. Previously unpublished particle-size 

analyses of suspended sediment used 

in the modified Einstein calculations. 34

15. Equations relating transport rates to simple 

hydraulic variables, with standard 

error of estimates in log units and percentages. _________________________ 34

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Bed material: The material composing the channel bed. For

this study, bed material is considered all sediment coarser

than 0.062 mm. 

Bedload: Sediment that moves on or very near the streambed,

in almost continuous contact with the bed. It moves by

skipping, sliding, and rolling. Motion is derived from

tractional and gravitational forces. 

Concentration: The ratio of the dry weight of sediment to the

weight of water sediment mixture of which it is part.

Sediment concentration is commonly expressed in parts per

million (ppm). 

Fine material: All sediment finer than 0.062 mm; also called

"wash load."

Sediment discharge: A time rate of movement of sediment

passing a cross section; also called "sediment transport

rate" or "sediment load." In this report, all sediment

discharges are given in tons per day. 

Suspended load: Sediment that is generally supported by

turbulence and is transported at about the velocity of the

water. 

Total sediment load: All the sediment being moved by the

stream, that is, suspended load and bedload. 

Unit water discharge: Water discharge for unit width of a

stream. 

Unit bed-material discharge: Discharge of bed material (material

coarser than 0.062 mm) per unit width of a stream.

SYMBOLS

a A coefficient_______________________

B Width_____________________

b An exponent _______________________

C Chezy discharge coefficient--_-______

e/V0 Dimensionless Chezy coefficient- _____

CT Bed-material concentration __________

D Mean depth_______________________

d Median diameter of bed material. _ _ _ _

rfjs Diameter of bed material for which 65

	percent by weight, is finer. _ _______

g Acceleration due to gravity, assumed

	constant and equal to 32.2. _________

k. Representative grain roughness, rfesQ Water discharge___________________

Q T Total bed-material discharge ________

g Unit water discharge.____________

qr Unit bed-material discharge.______

Unit

0

ft

0

ft 1/2 per sec

0

0

ft

mm

mm

ft per sec 2

ft

ft 8 per sec

tons per day

ft 8 per sec per ft

tons per day per

ft

8

Se

T

C7*

[/*

V

X

X

Y

7

P

P»

TO

T'

4>T

f

Unit

Water-surfaceslope_________________ 0

Standard error of estimate ___-_-_-_-- 0 

Water temperature-- ____-__-_------ °F

Shear velocity, JgDS- -- ft per sec 

Shear velocity associated with the

grain roughness.----------------- ft per sec

Mean velocity___________-_--_--_- ft per sec

An independent variable. ____---__ 0

A correction factor for transition from

smooth to rough boundary.-------- 0

A dependent variable_________ _ 0

Unit weight of water. __ __._ Ibsperft 8 

Unit weight of sediment- ------ Ibs per ft 8

Density of the fluid. _-___ -- slugs per ft* 

Density of the sediment__ slugs per ft 8 

Bed shear stress, yDS.-... Ibsperft 2 

An effective shear, p(C7i) 2 -__- Ibsperft 2 

A dimensionless transport function _ _ _ _ 0

A dimensionless shear parameter. _____ 0
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN THE RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO

By CARL F. NORDIN, JR., and JOSEPH P. BEVERAGE

ABSTRACT

This report describes hydraulic data, observed and computed 

sediment concentrations, and size distributions of bed-material 

samples for 293 observations and presents the results of a series 

of investigations at six sediment stations on the Rio Grande 

in New Mexico.

The Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, near San Ildefonso, N. Mex., 

the farthest upstream station, has a typical pool-and-riffle 

channel configuration, and the bed material consists of both sand 

and gravel. The Rio Grande at Cochiti and at San Felipe 

has a sand-gravel channel, but the marked controlling influence 

of riffles is lacking. The three downstream stations, near 

Bernalillo, at Albuquerque, and near Belen, have sand-bed 

channels. Slopes through the 110-mile reach range from about 

12 feet per mile at Otowi to 4 feet per mile near Belen.

Transport rates of bed material computed by the modified 

Einstein method are related to the simple hydraulic variables, 

discharge, unit discharge, and velocity, for each of the stations. 

The sediment transport relations are found to vary systematically 

in a downstream direction, that is, with bed-material size, and 

to fall into two distinct groupings, one for the confined or partially confined sections and the other for the laterally unrestricted 

sections. Sediment transport rates are greater at the wide 

sections for higher discharges and greater at the narrow sections 

for the lower flows, probably because the wider sections have 

a tendency to aggrade and channelize at the lower flows.

Flow characteristics differ markedly for the pool-and-riffle 

channel at Otowi and the sand-bed channel near Bernalillo. At 

Otowi, the depth, slope, bed shear stress, resistance to flow, 

and the bed-material size all increase with increasing discharge. 

Near Bernalillo, slope and bed-material characteristics are 

approximately constant, flow resistance, which is dependent 

upon bed configuration, decreases with increasing discharge, and 

the range in bed shear stress, compared to Otowi, is very limited.

The mean velocities and sediment discharges for the two 

stations are comparable, in spite of the wide differences in flow 

characteristics. Sediment transport rates are found to relate 

reasonably well to "effective shear," a measure of the shear 

stress resisted by the grain roughness only. However, the variable size distribution of the bed material introduces considerable 

scatter for the Otowi relation. The scatter is reduced by converting the shear-transport relations to dimensionless form, similar to the parameters used by Einstein (1950, Bagnold (1956). 

and A. A. Bishop ("Sediment transport in alluvial channels: a 

critical examination of Einstein's theory: Colorado State Univ. 

Ph. D. thesis, 1961). Consideration of the curves developed by 

Bishop to predict total bed-material discharge and of the dimensionless relations for the Rio Grande indicate that to be generally 

applicable, the shear stress-transport functions probably should 

include additional parameters to explain the influence of temperature and the effects of flow depth. Systematic changes in

bed-material characteristics for Otowi introduce changes in the 

sediment transport, independent of the hydraulics of the flow; a 

single simple parameter such as median diameter or a representative grain size is, therefore, not sufficient for characterization of the bimodal distribution of the bed material in the shear 

stress-transport functions.

The influence of temperature on sediment transport for the 

Rio Grande data is apparent, but a precise quantitative evaluation is impossible because the effects of temperature changes are 

not independent of the effects of interrelated changes in other 

variables.

INTRODUCTION

The sediment transported by natural streams often 

is an important factor in the design of reservoirs, 

conveyance channels, river rectification works, and 

related projects. To assist in understanding the complex phenomena of the mechanics of flow and sediment 

transport in alluvial channels and to provide basic data 

for the development of design methods and criteria, 

numerous laboratory and field studies have been undertaken. The Rio Grande in New Mexico has been the 

site of several investigations in sediment transport. 

This report presents the results of a series of investigations at six gaging stations on the middle Rio Grande 

in New Mexico.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The purpose of this report is to present observed 

sediment transport relations and to discuss some of the 

parameters describing the sediment and the flow which 

influence transport relations.

Sediment transport rates computed by the modified 

Einstein method (Colby and Hubbell, 1961) are given 

for 293 observations at the six gaging stations. The 

transport rates are related to simple hydraulic variables 

for each station, and the differences in the relations, 

from station to station, are discussed in terms of the 

bed-material size distributions and of the geometry of 

the cross sections.

The characteristics of flow and transport for a station 

with a pool-and-riffle channel configuration and for a 

sand-bed channel are compared, and the influence of bedmaterial size distribution and water temperature on 

sediment transport is considered briefly.

Fl
F2 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The data presented for the period 1952-58 were 

collected as a part of a joint program between the U.S. 

Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Keclamation.

This report was prepared under the supervision of 

J. M. Stow, district chemist, Albuquerque, N. Mex. 

W. L. Heckler, district engineer, Santa Fe, N. Mex., 

furnished the flow-duration curves and much of the 

basic hydraulic data from streamflow measurements.

DESCRIPTION OF THE REACH

Figure 1 is a location map of six gaging stations which 

are considered in this report. The stations, in downstream order, are:

Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, near San Ildefonso

Rio Grande at Cochiti

Rio Grande at San Felipe

Rio Grande near Bernalillo

Rio Grande at Albuquerque

Rio Grande near Belen

From Otowi Bridge to Cochiti, through White 

Kock Canyon, the Kio Grande has a typical pool-andriffle configuration. The riffles are composed of coarse 

gravel, cobbles, and boulders, and appear to be fairly 

stable and permanent features of the channel. Large 

cobbles and even boulders evidently move from the 

riffles during flood flows, but the relative shape and 

position of the riffles do not appear to change appreciably from year to year. At low discharges, the watersurface slope through the riffles is steep, the depth is 

shallow, and flow is supercritical. Because the riffles 

serve as controls, the water-surface slope through the 

pools may be very low, the depth is greater, and flow 

is subcritical. The bed material in the pools is sand at low 

flows and sand and gravel (a bimodal distribution) at 

high flows. At the Otowi station, the channel is confined, and the maximum width at the measuring section 

is about 150 feet.

Between Cochiti and San Felipe, the channel is 

braided between many bars and islands composed of 

coarse gravel and cobbles. As at Otowi, the bed is 

composed of sand at low discharges and of sand and 

gravel at higher flows. The cross section at Cochiti is 

relatively wide and unconfined; flow width varies upward to about 350 feet. At San Felipe, the channel is 

confined by a volcanic talus on the right bank and 

stable clay banks on the left; the maximum width at 

the measuring section is about 210 feet.

Downstream from the confluence of the Jemez Kiver, 

the Rio Grande is a sand-bed stream. The Bernalillo 

station has a confined measuring section, and for all 

discharges more than about 2,000 cfs (cubic feet per 

second), the flow width is approximately constant at 

270 feet.

During high flows, the discharge measurements and 

samples were obtained from highway bridges for the 

Rio Grande at Albuquerque and near Belen. However, 

except for local influence near the bridge piers, both of 

the sections are relatively unconfined, and flow widths 

range upward to about 400 feet at both sections.

A profile of the cannel from Otowi to Belen, a reach of 

about 110 miles, is shown in figure 2. Channel slopes 

range from 12 feet per mile near Otowi to about 4 feet 

per mile near Belen. The rate of change in slope with 

distance is nearly constant from Belen upstream to the 

Jemez River. From the Jemez River to White Rock 

Canyon, about 2 miles upstream from Cochiti, the 

slope increases rapidly. Through White Rock Canyon, 

the slope is nearly constant.

Nordin and Culbertson (1961) showed that the characteristics of the bed material in the middle Rio Grande 

change systematically with distance downstream from 

Otowi. This systematic variation is indicated by the 

average size distribution curves plotted in figure 3.

The behavior of the three downstream sections, which 

are sand-bed channels, and that of the three upstream 

sections, which are sand-gravel channels, differ significantly. These differences and some of their effects 

on the sediment-transport relations for the various 

sections will be discussed subsequently.

Three of the sections, Otowi, San Felipe, and Bernalillo, are confined or partially confined, but the other 

three stations are laterally unrestricted. The influence 

of width restrictions upon bed configuration and flow 

resistance has been demonstrated (Nordin, 1964), and 

sediment transport relations are also affected by lateral 

channel confinement, as will be shown.

BASIC DATA

The basic hydraulic data from water-discharge 

measurements and the water temperatures used in the 

modified Einstein calculations are given in tables 1-6. 

Also shown in the tables are the suspended-sediment 

concentrations from depth-integrated samples and 

computed total concentrations determined from modified Einstein calculations.

Tables 7-12 show the particle-size distribution of 

bed-material samples for each of the observations 

listed in tables 1-6. Most of the particle-size analyses 

of suspended-sediment samples used in the modified 

Einstein calculation have been previously published. 

Table 13 shows the sources in which these published 

data may be found. A few particle-size analyses not 

previously published are given in table 14.

Water-surface slopes were determined for many of 

the observations and are listed in tables 1-6. If water-
HIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F3

108-00' COLORADO 107° 00' 106° 00' 105°00'

35-00

34°00'

33°00'

32-00'

FIGURE 1. Map showing part of the Rio Grande drainage basin. Adapted from U.S Geological Survey New Mexico base map, scale 1:500,000.
F4 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

5500

5400

5300

5200

5100

5000

4900

4800

4700

4600

4500

4400

Otowi

Cochiti

San Felipe

 Bernalillo

. Albuquerque

Belen

DISTANCE ALONG RIVER, IN MILES 

ABOVE ELEPHANT BUTTE DAM

FIGURE 2. Channel profile of the Rio Orande from Otowi Bridge to Belen.

surface slopes were not observed, the average watersurface slope or the average bed slope determined from 

Bureau of Reclamation aggradation-degradation 

studies are shown.

Streamflow records for the six stations are given in 

Part 8 of the Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 

series "Surface-Water Supply of the United States." 

The station near Belen was discontinued in June 1957.

The stations at Otowi and near Bernalillo are daily 

sediment stations. Suspended-sediment loads for these 

stations and the results of miscellaneous observations 

at the other four stations are listed in Part 8 of the 

Water-Supply Paper series, "Quality of Surface Waters 

of the United States."

In addition to the Water-Supply Papers noted above 

and listed in table 13, the writers have drawn freely 

from data used or presented in previous studies of the 

Rio Grande (Culbertson and Dawdy, 1964; Nordin 

and Culbertson, 1961; Nordin and Dempster, 1963; 

Nordin, 1964).

o.oi 0.1

DIAMETER, IN MILLIMETERS 

FIGURE 3. Graph showing average size distribution of bed material. O, Otowi; +, Cochiti; A, San Felipe; ®, Bernalillo; D, Albuquerque; Ot Belen.
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F5

FLOW CHARACTERISTICS AND SEDIMENT 

CONCENTRATION

Flow in the Rio Grande is derived principally from 

snowmelt from the high mountains of northern New 

Mexico and southern Colorado. The spring runoff 

commences usually in March and persists for several 

months. El Vado Reservoir controls the flow of the 

Rio Chama and, within the limitations of the Rio 

Grande Compact, permits the regulation of continuous 

flow in the Rio Grande below Otowi during the irrigation season. Releases from El Vado Reservoir to 

downstream storage occasionally result in several 

months of sustained winter flow.

From Cochiti downstream, flow in the Rio Grande 

is depleted heavily by irrigation and by natural losses. 

Although the flow is generally perennial at Otowi and

Cochiti, it is usually intermittent at Albuquerque and 

Belen. Flow-duration curves for the period of record 

through 1959 or 1960 (fig. 4) show clearly the influence 

of irrigation and natural losses during the lower 

discharges.

Although by far the greatest volume of flow in the 

Rio Grande is from spring runoff and reservoir releases, 

tributary inflow from summer storms of short duration 

and high intensity may contribute appreciable quantities of flow and large quantities of sediment. Galisteo 

Creek, entering the Rio Grande from the east about 

8 miles downstream from the Cochiti station, is the 

largest tributary between Otowi and Belen and contributes heavy sediment loads to the Rio Grande. The 

Jemez River, joining the Rio Grande from the west 

about 8 miles north of the Bernalillo station, has been

O 

cc 

<

oo

(/) UJ

a o

UJ

UJ _J

MH O

U. UJ

99.9 

99.8 >-

99.5

99.0

98.0

95.0

90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0 

5.0

2.0 

1.0 

0.5 

0.2

0.1 I

100 500 1000 5000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIOUKE 4. Flow-duration curves for the period of record.

50,000

763-190 O 65 2

Station Period of record 

O Otowi.- . - 1896-1905,1910-14,1919-59 

+ Cochiti._____ 1927-60 

A San Felipe___ 1928,1931-60 

® Bernalillo-...... 1942-59

D Albuquerque 1943-60 

O Belen.... 1943-56
F6 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

regulated by the Jemez Canyon Reservoir since October 

1953, hence inflow from this tributary did not influence 

appreciably the sediment transport relations presented 

herein.

Tributary runoff from "thunderstorm" rainfall imposed upon main-channel flow will create a sharp peak 

in both the flow and the concentration of suspended 

sediment. The instantaneous peak discharge from such 

storm runoff is often as great as or even greater than 

the peak discharge during spring runoff from snowmelt, 

but the duration is brief, persisting from a few hours 

to a few days. After the peak of the storm runoff 

passes a measuring section, both the discharge and the 

concentration attenuate with time, approaching the 

more or less stable condition which persisted before 

the inflow, provided, of course, that the main-channel 

flow is reasonably constant. The concentration attenuates much more slowly than the water discharge 

(Nordin, 1964). The time dependency of the concentration is noticeable in either the total concentration 

or in the concentration of any particular size class, but 

the rate of attenuation with time appears to vary 

directly with the size class of the suspended sediment.

Variations of daily mean water discharge, concentration, and water temperature for the Rio Grande at 

Otowi Bridge and Rio Grande near Bernalillo, New 

Mex., are shown in figures 5 and 6, respectively. The 

general shapes of the hydrographs and of the temperature and concentration curves for the two stations are 

similar, and during the spring runoff, as during storm 

runoff, the sediment concentration 'tends to decrease 

with time, independent of flow conditions. However, 

during spring runoff, changes in concentration are 

usually accompanied by changes in water temperature, 

whereas during a storm-runoff event in late summer or 

fall, changes in concentration may be independent of 

temperature changes.

The similarity in the discharge and concentration 

curves for the two stations suggests that the sediment 

transport relations for the stations should also be similar 

but some noticeable differences in the hydraulic variables of the two sections merit consideration.

HYDRAULIC VARIABLES

Pertinent hydraulic variables, so far as sediment 

transport is concerned, are the mean velocity (V), the 

mean depth (Z>), the product of depth and slope, or the 

shear stress on the bed (yDS), and the ratio of velocity 

to shear, which is a measure of the channel flow resistance. More specifically, the ratio of mean velocity (V) 

to shear velocity (U*) may be taken as a measure of 

the overall channel roughness and is equal to Chezy's 

dimensionless coefficient

Except for the bank friction, the overall channel 

roughness in a natural channel with a movable bed 

depends upon (1) the grain roughness and (2) the roughness due to bed configurations the ripples, dunes, and 

bars which form on the bed. In general, only the part 

of the overall shear which is resisted by the grain 

roughness is effective in moving the bed material 

(Einstein, 1950; Laursen, 1958). Thus, the size distribution of the bed material, which determines the grain 

roughness, is a major factor in determining the effective 

shear stress. Strictly speaking, grain size cannot be 

classified as a hydraulic variable, but, because of the close 

relation of grain size to hydraulic factors, the size 

distribution of bed material will be considered in this 

section.

Some of the basic differences in behavior between the 

sand-bed channels of the Rio Grande and the channels 

that have a pool-and-riffle configuration and a bimodal 

distribution of bed material may be detected by considering the relations of simple hydraulic variables to 

discharge. For comparison, Otowi may be taken as a 

typical pool-and-riffle channel and Bernalillo as a 

typical sand-bed channel.

Figure 7 shows the observed water-surface slopes 

plotted against water discharges for Otowi and 

Bernalillo. The plotted points represent the data for 

1958-62 from tables 1 and 4, excluding the June 24, 

1958, observation at Otowi, which was not at the cable 

section, and the February 15, 1960, observation at 

Bernalillo, for which no slope was obtained. The slope 

at Bernalillo was approximately constant at about 

0.0008, but the slope at Otowi increased with discharge 

and, for the range of discharge considered, varied by a 

factor of about 3.

Water-surface slopes at Otowi, plotted in figure 7, 

were measured over a relatively short reach, about 10 

to 15 times the channel width, and are representative of 

the slopes through the pools, not the overall slope 

through a long reach. At low flows, the riffles serve 

as controls. At higher discharges, the controlling 

influence of the riffles is drowned out, and the watersurface slope approaches the natural topographic slope 

of the channel, about 12 feet per mile (0.0023).

At Bernalillo, the water-surface slope is about constant regardless of the length of reach considered, 

although the scatter about the average value is much 

greater when the slope is measured over shorter reaches.

Figure 8 shows mean velocity, depth, and width 

plotted against discharge, after the manner of Leopold 

and Maddock (1953). Lines were drawn through the 

plotted points, and the equations for the lines are shown 

on figure 8. The lines for Bernalillo were not extended 

below 2,000 cfs because there is an apparent break in
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F7

APRIL MAY JUNE JULY

FIGURE 5. Graph showing daily mean water discharge, daily mean suspended-sediment concentration, and water temperature, April through July, 1958, Rio Grande at

Otowi Bridge, near San Ildefonso, N. Mex.

the relation at lower discharges when channelization 

occurs.

The exponents for the equations relating velocity to 

discharge are greater than the average exponents given 

by Leopold and Haddock (1953, p. 9) because, for the

range of discharge considered, the measuring sections 

at both Otowi and Bernalillo are partially confined. 

Figure 8 shows that the depth is greater and increases 

more rapidly with discharge at Otowi and that the 

range in velocity is about the same at both stations.
F8 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

14,000 -

12,000 -

Q £ 10,000 -

O CO 

O H 

LJ CC 

CO < Q.

cr

LJ Z Q. t z~

p: 8000

o o

O H

I 5

6000

 LJ

Q co

tr Q

LJ LJ I- Q

400°

2000

APRIL MAY JUNE JULY

FIGTTBE 6 Graph showing daily mean water discharge, daily mean suspended-sediment concentration, and water temperature, April through July, 1958, Rio Grande near

Bernalillo, N. Mex.

Because both depth and water-surface slope increase 

with discharge more rapidly at Otowi than at Bernalillo, 

it may be concluded that the relation of the velocity 

to the shear stress is different for the two stations. 

Figure 9 shows the bed shear stress (7-0=7.DS) for

Bernalillo and Otowi plotted against discharge. For 

the same range in velocities, the shear stress at Bernalillo 

varies from about 0.05 to 0.24, or by a factor of 5, 

while the shear stress at Otowi varies from about 0.03 

to 1.50, by a factor of 50. Because shear stresses for
RIO GEANDE, NEW MEXICO F9

0.003

<f> 0.002

I _l I

1000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 7. Graph showing relation of water-surface slope to discharge for the Rio 

Grande at Otowi Bridge and near Bernalillo. (Q, Otowi; , Bernalillo.)

Otowi were computed using local water-surface slopes 

through a pool, the range in shear stress is greater than 

if an average water-surface slope including both pools 

and riffles had been used.

These observations show the basic distinction between 

the hydraulics of the pool-and-riffle channels and of 

the sand-bed channels of the Rio Grande the difference 

in the relation of flow resistance to discharge In the 

sand-bed channels, flow resistance is dependent mostly 

upon bed configuration. Flow may be classified conveniently into lower regime flow over a dune bed and 

upper regime flow over a plane bed (Culbertson and 

Dawdy, 1964). Between upper and lower regimes of 

flow is a transition region in which bed configurations 

and flow resistance vary widely. Lower regime flow 

is characterized by low sediment discharge and high 

flow resistance. Conversely, for upper regime flow, 

the sediment transport rate is high and the flow resistance is extremely low, dependent mostly upon grain 

roughness (Dawdy, 1961).

In pool-and-riffle channels, however, the flow resistance often increases with discharge, and the influence 

of the bed configuration at low flows appears to be 

completely overshadowed by the controlling influence 

of the riffles. A distinguishing feature of a pool-andriffle channel is that at low discharges the energy 

dissipation is nonuniformly distributed along the 

channel and is concentrated at the riffles, whereas, at 

higher discharges, the distribution of energy dissipation 

approaches a more uniform condition along the channel.

Figure 10 shows the relation of C/Jg to discharge for 

Bernalillo and Otowi. The dashed lines show the 

approximate average values of Cj-Jg for lower and upper 

regime flow at Bernalillo; the solid line shows the trend 

of Cf-Jg values for Otowi. A C/^/g value of about 8 for 

the highest discharges at Otowi represents an extremely 

high flow resistance, greater than the resistance for 

flow over a well-defined dune bed.

The increase in the flow resistance with discharge at

Otowi is due in part to the influence of bank roughness 

and in part to changes in the size distribution of the 

bed material which accompany the higher flows. The 

effects of the bank roughness may be accounted for, at 

least crudely, by the method outlined by Einstein 

(1942). The influence of the changing size distribution 

of the bed material requires additional consideration.

For most practical purposes, the particle-size distribution of the bed material for the sand-bed channels of 

the Rio Grande may be considered invariant and 

independent of discharge (Nordin and Culbertson, 

1961). At Otowi, on the other hand, the size distribution of the bed material varies widely and erratically. 

The deviation of the median diameter about the average 

value from figure 3 is shown in figure 11, where median 

diameter (d) is plotted against water discharge.

As table 7 shows, the distribution of the bed material 

at Otowi sometimes is bimodal, and, although the 

dominant mode is composed of sand and the median 

diameter is usually in the sand size class (0.062-2.00 mm), 

the percentage of gravel is appreciable. The percentage 

of gravel in the bed material appears to vary roughly 

with discharge and also with time during a single runoff 

event. Antecedent conditions are probably important.

The size distributions of bed material in table 7, 

however, represent only material from the measuring 

section at Otowi that is, from the pool. The material 

composing the riffles is much coarser, ranging in size 

from coarse gravel to boulders many feet in diameter.

At high flows, above 4,000 cfs, the overall flow resistance at Otowi is practically constant in spite of wide 

variations in the percentage of gravel in the bed material. Possibly, the flow resistance is independent of 

grain roughness at these higher discharges. However, 

the bed material generally becomes coarser with higher 

discharges, hence the grain roughness is at least partially 

responsible for the high flow resistance. The difficulties 

of obtaining representative samples of coarse gravel beds 

preclude adequate evaluation of a representative grain 

roughness.

For sand-gravel channels of the Rio Grande where 

riffle controls are lacking, the hydraulic behavior is 

between that of a sand-bed channel and that of a pooland-riffle channel. Cochiti and San Felipe, for example, 

have the characteristics of sand-bed channels at d:scharges below about 2,000 cfs. The bed configuration 

is dunes, the size distribution of the bed material and the 

water-surface slope vary conservatively, and the flow 

resistance, which depends mostly upon bed configuration, decreases with discharge. At flows above 2,000 

cfs, the bed material becomes coarser and flow resistance 

increases with discharge.

An increase in the size of the bed material is not 

necessarily accompanied by a decrease in the bed
no SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

10

OTOWI

> o I- O

< W 

LlJ LJ

10

BERNALILLO

10

Z)=0.12Q0.48

10

Z)=0.12Q0.39

400

- 200

I

HQ

£

100

400

200 -

100

0

1 ' 1

 #3> tr-oo c^pxrCD O0

£=270^0 -

O

1 i 1

1000 5000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1000 5000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 8. Graph showing relation of width, depth, and velocity to discharge for the Rio Qrande at Otowi Bridge and near Bernalillo.

elevation. The channel does not need to scour to the 

source of the coarser material; the gravel is actually 

transported into the reach from an upstream source, 

probably from the gravel bars and temporary islands 

which form at low and intermediate discharges.

Summarizing, for the sand-bed channels of the Rio 

Grande, the characteristics of the bed material and the 

water-surface slope are approximately constant. The 

flow resistance is dependent upon bed configuration and

decreases with discharge until a plane bed occurs, 

whereupon the resistance, measured by C/^/g, becomes 

approximately constant. At Otowi, where the channel 

has a pool-and-riffle configuration, the size of the bed 

material, the water-surface slope, and the flow resistance 

all increase with increasing discharge. The stations at 

Cochiti and San Felipe behave as sand-bed channels at 

lower flows, whereas, at higher flows, the size of the bed 

material and the flow resistance increase with discharge.
,RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO Fll

1.6 

1.4 

1.2 

1.0

S °'8

z

O 0.6

0.4

0.2

0 5000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 9. Graph showing relation of bed shear stress (TO) to discharge for Rio 

Grande at Otowi Bridge and near Bernalillo. O, Otowi; , Bernalillo.

20

10

400 1000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 10. Graph showing relation of C/Vff to discharge for the Rio Grande at 

Otowi Bridge and near Bernalillo. O, Otowi; , Bernalillo.

TRANSPORT RELATIONS

The various components of the sediment load of 

streams, which is the total quantity of sediment being 

moved by a stream, can be defined in terms of (1) the 

method of movement and (2) the source. In defining 

the components by method of movement, a distinction 

is made between the suspended sediment, or suspended 

load, and the bedload. The suspended load is the sediment in suspension which is transported at about the 

velocity of the water. The bedload is the sediment that 

moves by sliding, rolling, or skipping on or very near 

the streambed.

In defining the sediment load by source, a distinction 

is made between the fine material, which is commonly 

called "wash load" (Einstein, 1950), and the coarse 

material, which is usually referred to as the "bedmaterial load." The bed-material load is that part of 

the sediment load of a stream which is composed of 

particle sizes found in appreciable quantities in the 

shifting portions of the streambed. The fine-sediment 

load is that part of the sediment load of a stream which

1.2

1.0

0.6

0.4

0.2

I I I TT I I 

1.46 1.25 1.88

4

..25 1.8! 

\ »

Average d (Otowi)=0.50mm

^Average d (Bernalillo)=0.29 mm

400 1000 10,000 

DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

FIGURE 11. Graph showing relation of median diameter of bed material to discharge 

for the Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge and near Bernalillo. O. Otowi; Bernalillo.

is composed of particle sizes finer than those generally 

found in shifting portions of the streambed.

As defined above, the only distinction between the 

fine-sediment load and the coarse-sediment load is one 

based upon the size distribution of the bed material. 

Such a definition gives little insight into the mechanics 

of sediment transport. Arbitrary definitions are therefore adopted which are based upon the properties of the 

two types of loads.

In general, the fine material is delivered to a channel 

by surface runoff, its transport rate is governed by the 

rate at which it is made available, and it is never transported at stream capacity, except in the upper limiting 

case of a mudflow. On the other hand, the transport 

rate of bed material moving past a given cross section 

in a stream presumably is governed solely by the ability 

of the flow to move the material. Bed material is 

always transported at the stream capacity, bacause any 

material in excess of stream capacity is immediately 

deposited and any deficit of material may be replenished 

by scouring the bed.

From a practical viewpoint, then, the bed material 

may be defined as that part of the sediment load for 

which a functional relation exists between the transport 

rate and the flow. The transport rate of fine material 

is not functionally related to the flow.

The distinction between the bed material and the 

fine material sometimes is quite obvious from histograms of the size distributions of bed-material samples 

and suspended-sediment samples, as shown in figure 12.
F12 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

40 -1

30 -

20 -

5

o 

111

<« 10

z

(f>111

o o

CC 

Q.

o

Bed material

20 -

10-

Suspended sediment

8 8

d d 

V 8

8 8

in ^

SIZE CLASS, IN MILLIMETERS

FIGURE 12 Histograms of size distributions of bed material and suspended 

sediment for Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, July 20,1961.

Because none of the material finer than 0.062 mm is 

found in the bed material, it must be assumed that all 

material finer than this size is wash load. At other 

times, especially if large quantities of fine sand are 

transported, the distinction is not so simple. Material 

in the size class from 0.062 to 0.125 mm may behave 

as bed-material load at low flows and as wash load at 

higher flows, especially in the reaches that have pooland-riffle channel configurations and in reaches in 

which extremely low discharges or periods of no flow 

occur. However, even though a functional relation 

between the flow and the discharge of finer sand sizes 

is not always readily apparent, observations show that 

decreases in the transport rates of these sand sizes are 

accompanied by decreases in the percentage of the same 

size classes in the composition of the bed material 

(Nordin and Beverage, 1964). These observations support the conclusions of Einstein and Chien (1953), who 

suggested that there is basically no difference in the 

interrelations of the flow, transport rate, and bed composition for the so-called wash load and the bed-material 

load, provided the composition of the surface layer of 

the bed is adequately defined. However, because it is 

virtually impossible, under most field conditions, to

obtain adequate samples of the surface layer of the 

bed, the distinction between bed-material load and finematerial load must be maintained.

In this report, all material coarser than 0.062 mm is 

considered bed material. Of course, inclusion of the 

finer sand sizes may introduce some unexplained scatter 

in the transport relations, but the relation between the 

flow and the transport rate of material coarser than 

0.062 mm is as well defined as are the relations for only 

the coarser fractions. Figure 13 is a plot of unit discharge (water discharge per foot of width) against unit 

bed-material discharge (bed-material discharge per foot 

of width) for transported materials (A) coarser than 

0.062 mm, (B) coarser than 0.125 mm, and ((7) coarser 

than 0.250 mm for the Kio Grande at Otowi Bridge. 

The lines shown were fitted by least squares. The 

standard errors of estimate were computed for each 

relation and are shown by the broken lines on the 

graph. The standard error is a measure of the relative 

scatter of the plotted points about the line of relation 

that is, approximately two-thirds of the points fall 

within plus or minus one standard error, in log units.

The use of the 0.062-mm size as the break between 

bed material and fine material has the practical advantage of coinciding with the break between the sand 

sizes and the silt-clay sizes. Also, in general, material 

finer than 0.062 mm is uniformly distributed, vertically and laterally, in a cross section. Thus, a sample 

at any point in the cross section usually will give a 

representative picture of the transport rate of the fine 

material.

TRANSPORT BATES BELATED TO SIMPLE 

HYDRAULIC VARIABLES

For comparison purposes, transport rates can be 

related to hydraulic variables as simple power functions 

of the form

Y=aX», (1)

Station-to-station differences can be investigated in 

terms of the intercepts (a) and slopes (6) of the various 

relations. The formulas can be determined by fitting 

a straight line through logarithmic plots of the variables 

considered.

For this report, lines were fitted to the plotted points 

by the method of least squares. For some practical 

applications, lines fitted to the arithmetic averages of 

the dependent and independent variables for selected 

intervals of the independent variable might be more 

desirable (Colby 1956, 1957); however, group averages 

often yield curvilinear relations, which are difficult to 

compare, rather than the simple linear relation in terms 

of logarithms of equation 1.
(RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F13

1000

100

O IW o

Go: 10

LJ LJ 

00 Q.

1000

100

10

B

1000

100

10

10 100 "4 10 100 "4 10 

UNIT WATER DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND PER FOOT OF WIDTH

100

FIQUEE 13. Graphs showing unit bed-material transport rates for the Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge for material. A coarser than 0.062 mm; B coarser than 0.125 mm;

and C coarser than 0.250 mm.

The relations for a given station are not directly 

comparable to the relations for another station unless 

the data for both stations cover the same periods of 

time, runoff events, and range of flow conditions. These 

qualifications are met only for Cochiti and San Felipe. 

For the other stations, especially Otowi and Belen, for 

which only a limited number of observations were available, the validity of the comparisons are open to question. In the following discussion, therefore, emphasis 

is given to the qualitative aspects of the relations.

From the data in tables 1-6, four types of transport 

equations were determined for each station; the following relations were defined: bed-material discharge 

(Qr) to water discharge, (Q) (fig. 14-4), unit bedmaterial (qT} to unit water discharge (q) (fig. 145), 

unit bed-material discharge to mean velocity (V) (fig. 

14(7), and (4) bed-material concentration (Or) to mean 

velocity (fig. 14Z>).

The individual observations for each of these relations, together with the lines determined by the method 

of least squares, are plotted for the Rio Grande near San 

Felipe in figure 14. The amount of scatter about the 

lines is typical of such relations and gives a reasonable 

indication of the magnitude of errors which might be 

introduced if such relations are used to estimate transport rates.

753r-190 O 65 3

Table 15 gives the equations for each of the relations 

for the six stations and the standard error of the estimate (Sg) in terms of log units and percentages (of the 

values given by the curve).

Logically, the relations, in terms of the standard 

errors, are better defined for the narrow confined sections than for the wider sections because both the 

simple hydraulic variables and the factors entering the 

total load calculations are more difficult to measure or 

sample accurately at the wider sections.

Figures 15-18 show the plotted lines for each of the 

computed relations in table 15. The lines are drawn 

through the approximate range for which they were 

defined.

Two important features of the curves are immediately 

apparent: (1) the slopes of the curves (the exponent 6 

in eq. 1) tend to increase with distance downstream 

from Otowi and (2) the curves fall into two distinct 

groups, one group representing the confined sections 

at Otowi, San Felipe, and Bernalillo and the other 

group representing the unconfined sections at Cochiti, 

Albuquerque, and Belen.

Both of these characteristics of the curves might be 

expected, at least for some of the relations. The increasing exponent in a downstream direction may result from the decreasing bed-material size. For a
BED-MATERIAL DISCHARGE, IN TONS 

UNIT BED-MATERIAL DISCHARGE, IN TONS PER DAY PER FOOT OF WIDTH

m O 

TO o

85

is

UNIT BED-MATERIAL DISCHARGE, IN TONS PER DAY 

m o 

33

m . 

o -

o z

is

m

BED-MATERIAL CONCENTRATION, IN PARTS PER MILLION

5 8

o o

- b

O (/)

z o

O I

o z o 

So

O 03 "" O

^o rn
UNIT BED-MATERIAL DISCHARGE, IN TONS PER DAY PER FOOT OF WIDTH

5 8

BED-MATERIAL DISCHARGE, IN 

H- 

§

o 

o 

BED-MATERIAL CONCENTRATION, IN PARTS PER MILLION BY WEIGHT

1-1 O

i_» o o

o o o o

o I 2 

li i

sf. I - |-1

a 8

C -J

& 3

£ x

f % § o

jo o

TO Z

« o

UNIT BED-MATERIAL DISCHARGE, IN TONS PER 

________________!- O 

I | 
FIG SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

given increase in discharge, the percent increase in the 

transport of finer material is greater than the percent 

increase in the transport of coarser material. The 

groupings of the curves in terms of the confined and 

unconfined sections is logical for the relations involving mean velocity and unit water discharge because 

these two variables are closely interrelated with the 

ability of the flow to adjust its width. Velocity and 

depth will increase with increasing discharge more 

rapidly at sections of constant width than at sections 

where the width increases with discharge. Both the 

slopes and the intercepts of the curves involving unit 

discharge and velocity reflect the rate of change in 

velocity and depth with discharge.

The reason is not obvious for §uch marked differences 

between the confined and unconfined sections for the 

relations of total bed-material discharge (QT) to water 

discharge (Q). Figure 15 shows that for any discharge 

below 1,000 cfs, more sediment is transported at the 

narrow sections than at the wide sections. At discharges greater than about 4,000 cfs, the reverse is true; 

greater sediment loads are carried at the wider sections.

Figure 15 suggests that for any given period of time, 

say a spring runoff event, the pattern of scour and fill 

throughout the length of the reach will depend partly 

upon the nature of the cross section of the channel. 

During floods, scour occurs generally throughout a reach 

(Leopold and Wolman, 1956), and whereas the depth of 

scour will depend to a large extent upon local factors, 

greater volumes of material obviously should move from 

the wider sections than from the narrower sections if the 

trends shown in figure 15 are correct. Conversely, at 

low flows, greater volumes of material are moved 

through the narrow sections. At intermediate flows, 

shown by the converging lines in figure 15, the sedimenttransport rates are about the same at all sections.

Observations of the Rio Grande near Bernalillo 

(Nordin, 1964) indicated that at low and intermediate 

flows, deposition and channelization occur concurrently 

with a decrease in width at the wider sections. These 

observations tend to confirm the general low-flow relations shown on figure 15.

Downstream from Cochiti, flow decreases in a downstream direction because of depletion by irrigation and 

channel losses from infiltration and evapotranspiration, 

and therefore, comparisons of the curves in figure 15 at 

equal discharges may be misleading. However, a comparison of transport rates from figures 4 and 15 at equal 

frequencies of discharge shows almost the same trends. 

At high flows, greater sediment loads are carried by the 

wide sections; at low flows, greater sediment loads are 

transported at the narrow sections.

The basic differences in the transport relations in 

figures 15-18 appear to be related directly to the nature

of the cross sections that is, to whether the channel is 

confined or laterally unrestricted. Even the plot of 

mean velocity and unit bed-material discharge (fig. 17), 

which is the most closely knit relation, indicates that 

the curves separate into groups for the confined and unconfined sections. This separation is a direct result of 

the effect of depth upon the transport of bed material, 

as shown by Colby (1961).

The most elemental relation, shown in figure 18, is 

the plot of mean velocity and bed-material concentration. Here, the influence of width restrictions and of 

concomitant depth effects are especially obvious. At 

the higher velocities, the effects of particle size are also 

readily apparent. For a given velocity, the higher concentrations are associated with the finer bed materials.

Bogardi (1961) furnished values of exponents for the 

concentration-velocity relations at six stations on the 

Danube River. The exponents given by Bogardi are 

of the same order of magnitude as those for the reach 

from Otowi to Bernalillo. His values, however, decreased from the upper station to the third station 

downstream and then remained constant. Bogardi 

found that, for any given velocity, the concentration 

increased in a downstream direction. This relation 

does not hold for the Rio Grande data shown in figure 

18, except at the high velocities.

Any of the relations in figures 15-18 could be useful 

in practical applications. Curves such as those in 

figure 15 may be used in conjunction with a flowduration curve to estimate long-term sediment yields 

(Miller, 1951). Relations based on unit discharge or 

mean velocity (figs. 16-18) are useful for estimating 

bed-material discharge at cross sections for which the 

curves were drawn or at similar cross sections (Colby, 

1964).

The relations of mean velocity to unit bed-material 

discharge (fig. 17) appear the most logical type of 

sediment-transport curve to use for practical applications because the curves are about the same for all the 

stations, a point emphasized by Colby (1964). However, inasmuch as the curves have a relatively steep 

slope, any error in estimating mean velocity, width and 

depth being known, will introduce a larger percentage 

of error into the estimates of total bed-material discharge from the curves of figure 17 than is in estimates 

for any of the other transport relations shown.

The method of least squares is not always ideally 

suited for defining sediment-transport relations for 

practical applications, especially for the relations shown 

in table 15, because the data were not screened to 

eliminate unrepresentative sediment samples or concentrations which reflect the influence of tributary 

inflow.
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F17

The important features of the curves, however, are 

in the qualitative aspects of the relations. The sediment discharge apparently is greater at the wide sections 

at high flows and greater at the narrow sections at low 

flows. This difference is probably due to the tendency 

for the wide sections to aggrade and channelize at low 

flows. These differences in transport relations, which 

appear to reflect the characteristics of the cross sections, 

carry into the relations which are expressed on a unit 

width basis. Thus, the transport rates related to 

simple hydraulic variables for a particular cross section, 

such as the V-q? relations of figure 17, may require 

considerable adjustment to be applicable to other types 

of cross sections.

The transport relations in figures 15-18 are useful for 

qualitative comparisons, but no single simple hydraulic 

variable can be expected to describe adequately the 

complex processes of bed-material transport. In the 

following section, some of the more complex factors and 

parameters which influence sediment transport are 

considered.

TRANSPORT PARAMETERS

Many factors influence sediment transport, and the 

paramet&rs which describe the sediment, the channel 

geometry and the flow may be expressed either in 

dimensional or dimensionless forms. Dimensionless 

parameters are especially useful in reducing to comparable terms systems with variables of different orders 

of magnitude. On the other hand, it is often desirable 

to investigate the very simplest relations because the 

more complex parameters sometimes mask the interrelations of the variables considered, especially in 

investigations of field data, where controls of the 

factors usually considered as independent variables 

are lacking.

For this report, consideration was given only to some 

of the hydraulic parameters through the simpler 

relations for the stations at Otowi and near Bernalillo. 

No attempt was made to analyze, in detail, all the 

basic data.

SHEAR STRESS AND EFFECTIVE SHEAR STRESS

The transport curves in figures 15-17 are remarkably 

similar for Otowi and Bernalillo, especially in view of 

the extreme differences in the flow characteristics for 

the two stations. In figure 19, the relations of the unit 

bed-material discharge to the bed shear stress (To=yDS) 

show different trends for Bernalillo and Otowi (the 

plotted points are for the same data compared in the 

previous discussion of flow characteristics). The steep 

slope in the trend of points for Bernalillo is indicative 

of the narrow range in shear stress for which there

"-

b.oi o.i i.o 10

BED SHEAR STRESS (I), IN POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT

FIGURE 19. Graph showing relation of unit bed-material discharge to bed shear 

stress for the Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge (O) and near Bernalillo ( ).

exists a relatively wide range of velocity and sedimenttransport rates. Such a trend (rapidly increasing 

bed-material discharge with respect to shear stress) is 

characteristic of shallow sand-bed streams in which the 

velocity-depth relation is controlled mostly by the 

bed configuration of the channel. For Otowi, the 

points follow the Bernallilo trend up to transport rates 

(gy) of about 100 tons per day per foot of width; then 

there is a break in the trend for the higher transport 

rates. The break in the relation corresponds roughly 

with the flow conditions during which the controlling 

influences of the riffles is drowned out and during which 

the bed material begins to exhibit a marked bimodal 

distribution.

As mentioned previously, in the discussion of 

hydraulic variables, however, only the shear stress 

resisted by the grain roughness is effective in transporting sediment.

The concept of an effective shear stress or shear 

velocity has been utilized in transport relations by 

Meyer-Peter and Muller (1948), Einstein (1950), 

Colby and Hembree (1955), Laursen (1958), and 

perhaps others. The effective shear stress may be 

considered the bed shear stress which would yield the 

observed mean velocity if the flow resistance were due 

only to grain roughness. Effective shear stress may be 

estimated by selecting a representative grain size as a 

characteristic roughness length and introducing this 

grain size into some velocity-shear stress-roughness 

relation.

For this report, only one method of estimating 

effective shear was considered, the equation given by
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

Colby and Hembree (1955, equation E, p. 83) as

V

"5.75 logw (l2.27Dx/ks)

(2)

where C7*=the shear velocity with respect to the 

particles, 

#=a correction factor for the transition from

smooth to rough boundary, and 

&s =the representative grain roughness, taken as 

c?65, the diameter of bed material for 

which 65 percent by weight is finer. 

The parameter x is given as a function of shear velocity 

(C/*), the grain roughness (kg), and the kinematic 

viscosity of the fluid.

Assuming that equation 2 applies to the flow, U# is 

the shear velocity which would produce the observed 

mean velocity for flow with mean depth D and grain 

roughness ks . The effective shear stress may be computed asr' = p(C/;) 2 .

When transport rates are plotted against effective 

shear stress (fig. 20), the reason for the similarity in

1000

100

10

GO 

(9

 o

 

 o

o

0.01 0.1 1.0 

EFFECTIVE SHEAR (r ), IN POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT

FIGUEE 20. Graph showing relation of unit bed-material discharge to effective shear 

stress for the Bio Grande at Otowi Bridge (O) and near Bernalillo ( ).

transport relations at the two stations is readily 

apparent the range in effective shear stress at the two 

stations is about the same. Although both depth and 

slope increase more rapidly at Otowi than at Bernalillo, 

the increase in flow resistance at Otowi offsets the increase in bed shear stress (yDS); hence the mean 

velocity is about the same as the mean velocity at 

Bernalillo for comparable discharges. Depth is greater 

and increases more rapidly with discharge at Otowi, 

but the bed material also becomes coarser with discharge, and the logarithm of the ratio D/ks changes 

very little. The adjustments in the relations of 

velocity, depth, slope, and flow resistance for Bernalillo 

and Otowi are completely dissimilar; yet, so far as 

transport relations are concerned, the end results are 

about the same.

There are still some erratic points in figure 20 for 

Otowi which might be expected to relate in some way 

to the variable size distribution of the bed material. 

Some of the scatter can be reduced by converting 

figure 20 to the form of a dimensionless shear stresstransport relation, as shown in figure 21. In this 

figure, abscissa values become

(3)

and the ordinate values are

 nV/2 =)' (4)

where ps =the density of the sediment, assumed equal

to 5.14 slugs per cubic foot, 

p=the density of the fluid, 1.94 slugs per cubic

foot, 

g=acceleration due to gravity, 32.2 feet per

second squared, 

d=the median diameter of the bed material, in

feet,

7=p& and 

7*=Ps0.

Equations 3 and 4 are very similar in form to Bagnold's dimensionless shear-transport relation (Bagnold, 

1956, eq. 42), and to Einstein's ^'=# relation (Einstein, 

1950, equations 11, 42). Equation 3 is analogous to 

1/ty'. However, both Einstein and Bagnold used the 

bed-load discharge in equation 4 rather than the total 

bed-material discharge, and Bagnold employed the total 

bed shear, rather than an effective shear.

A. A. Bishop (Sediment transport an alluvial channels: a critical examination of Einstein's theory: 

Colorado State Univ. Ph. D. thesis, 1961) suggested
iRIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO ,F19

50,000

10,000

100

FIGUBE 21. Graph showing a dimensionless shear stress-transport relation for the 

Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge (O) and near Bernalillo ( ).

that the total bed-material discharge (qT) should be 

used in a dimensionless shear-transport relation similar 

to figure 21, and he proceeded to develop a family of 

curves from flume data for various sizes of bed material. 

The shear parameter $' is not directly comparable to 

equation 3 because different velocity equations were 

used to define the effective shear stresses, but a qualitative comparison shows that several differences exist 

between the relations in figure 21 and Bishop's curves. 

First, Bishop's curves show unrealistically high transport rates for the fine bed material at the higher effective shear stress values (low $' values); and second, for 

a given shear intensity (^') Bishop's curves show greater 

<!>T values for the finer sand than for the coarser material, 

whereas for figure 21, the reverse is true. The transport function <j> T is generally greater for Otowi than for 

Bernalillo.

The high transport rates in Bishop's relations may be 

attributable to the influence of standing waves and

antidunes present in the flume at the high effective 

shears. Antidunes and standing waves are often 

observed in the Rio Grande but, because standing waves 

seldom occupy the full width of a natural channel, their 

influence on bed-material transport is usually local 

and transient (Nordin, 1964).

The trends of the plotted points in figure 21 suggest 

that Bishop is perhaps correct in attempting to develop 

a shear-transport relation in which the total bedmaterial transport rate rather than the bedload only is 

employed in the transport function. However, if 

Bishop's curves are applicable to the Rio Grande data, 

the Otowi points should fall below the Bernalillo points.

A consideration of equations 3 and 4 or of Bishop's 

<fr f =(f>T curves shows two major shortcomings in the 

effective shear stress-transport relations. First, there 

is no direct consideration of temperature, which may 

have considerable influence on sediment transport 

through its direct effect on particle-fall velocity and 

its indirect effect on bed form (Straub and others, 1958; 

Kennedy, 1961); second, for any given value of effective 

shear stress, the bed-material discharge increases with 

increasing depth (Colby, 1961). To be generally 

applicable, the shear-transport relations of equations 3 

and 4 should contain some correction for the effects of 

temperature and depth. Laursen (1958) gives the ratio 

of shear velocity to fall velocity as a major factor in 

determining both the bed-load concentration and the 

total bed-material concentration, and it seems likely 

that some form of this ratio should be introduced in the 

shear-transport parameters of figure 21. The ratio is a 

measure of the relative concentration distribution of 

suspended sediment and is commonly used in sediment 

transport relations.

This consideration of effective shear stress and transport for Otowi and Bernalillo leads to several important 

conclusions. The relations of velocity, shear, and 

roughness at the two stations are completely dissimilar, 

but the effects are compensating. At Otowi, the depth, 

bed shear stress, and roughness increase rapidly with 

discharge, whereas at Bernalillo, the depth and bed 

shear stress increase slowly and flow resistance decreases 

with increasing discharge. As a result, the velocity 

and effective shear at the two stations are about the 

same and the sediment transport relations are similar.

Either effective shear stress or mean velocity may be 

considered major parameters in sediment transport, as 

pointed out by Colby (1964). More specifically, the 

dimensionless transport function of equation 3, which 

is actually a measure of the ratio of the effective shear 

stress at the bed to the resistance of the topmost layer 

of the bed (Bagnold, 1956), would seem to be more 

suitable than the effective shear stress only.
F20 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

Probably, the total bed-material transport may be 

considered a function of some shear-stress parameter 

as suggested by Bishop and as indicated by figure 21. 

However, some factors apparently would have to be 

introduced to explain the effect of temperature and 

depth.

No attempt was made to determine the most suitable 

method of estimating effective shear stress, to assess 

the grain size which should be used in equations 2, 3, 

and 4, or to introduce any corrections for the influence 

of temperature and depth in equations 3 and 4. These 

are questions which certainly deserve further study, 

but because total transport rates cannot generally be 

measured directly in the field, they are more suited to 

controlled laboratory investigations than to field 

studies. Actually, the lack of precision with which 

unit bed-material discharge (g>) may be determined in 

the Rio Grande precludes any precise definition of the 

transport function (<f> T).

It might be pointed out that plotting the bedmaterial discharge (g>) against effective shear stress 

in figures 20 and 21 is not exactly accurate, because 

the effective shear stress, or rather, the effective shear 

velocity from equation 2, is used to compute qT in the 

modified Einstein method. However, Nordin (1964) 

has also pointed out that the total transport rate of 

bed material given by the modified Einstein method is 

dependent mostly upon the concentrations of bed 

material from suspended-sediment samples and that 

for a given cross section, excluding very shallow depths, 

the computed transport rates of material coarser than 

0.062 mm bear a nearly constant ratio to the measured 

transport rates. Thus, the same qualitative conclusions 

could be drawn from figures 20 and 21, even if only 

the measured bed-material discharge had been considered.

BED-MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS

For most sand-bed channels, the characteristics of 

the bed material change slightly with discharge or with 

time, and the bed-material characteristics to be used in 

transport parameters may often be expressed in terms 

of the median diameter or of some representative grain 

size. Even for some of the more complicated transport 

formulas, it is usually sufficient to specify only the 

median diameter and some simple gradation coefficient, 

or, as in the Meyer-Peter and Muller (1948) transport 

relations, an effective diameter which is weighted in 

terms of the percentage of each size class considered. 

For sand-gravel channels, however, in which the bed 

material exhibits a bimodal distribution and in which 

the distribution changes with time and discharge, such 

a simple representation of the bed-material characteristics does not seem adequate. Furthermore, it is difficult 

to relate, except in a general qualitative manner, the 

observed changes in the bed-material distribution to the 

observed changes in the transport relations. For example, from the data in table 1, the concentration of 

the bed material for Otowi decreases with time for the 

first five observations in 1958, but the temperature, 

velocity, depth, water-surface slope, and flow resistance 

change only a little. This apparent lack of a definable 

relationship between hydraulic variables and sediment 

transport was also obvious in figures 20 and 21.

The changes with time of the transport rates shown 

in table 1 must be directly related to the systematic 

changes with time of the characteristics of the bed 

material, shown in figure 22. Obviously, the median 

diameter and some simple gradation coefficient are 

not sufficient to describe the distributions in figure 22.

The lowest mean bed elevation (Culbertson and 

Dawdy, 1964) was for the second observation, on May 

12, 1958. For the next three observations, the bed 

elevation increased somewhat an indication that the 

coarse material was being transported into the reach 

from an upstream source and that some sort of selective 

transport process was depleting the material in the size 

range from about 0.5 mm to 2.0 mm. Field observations indicate that at low flows, sand is stored in the 

pools of pool-and-riffle channels. At higher flows, this 

sand is swept into suspension or otherwise moved from 

the pools, and some concurrent scour reduces the bed 

elevation, whereas the coarser gravel appears to move 

more or less continuously, independent of the bed 

elevation that is, independent of channel scour. These 

observations explain, in part, why some of the cross 

sections of the Rio Grande exhibit the characteristics 

of sand-bed channels at low flows and of sand-gravel 

channels at high flows (Nordin and Culbertson, 1961). 

However, the problems of determining what causes 

systematic changes in bed-material characteristics in 

sand-gravel and pool-and-riffle channels, of describing 

methods to predict these changes, and of evaluating 

parameters to represent adequately the characteristics 

of the bed material in transport relations remain to be 

solved.

TEMPERATURE EFFECTS

The influence of temperature on sediment transport 

has been well documented by Straub and others (1958) 

and by Kennedy (1961), who have shown that a 50 °F 

decrease in temperature will approximately triple the 

transport rate of bed material, other factors constant.

Figures 5 and 6 show that, for the Rio Grande, an 

increase in temperature accompanies a decrease in 

concentration during the spring-runoff event. The
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F21

99.9

99.8

99.5

99.0

98.0

95.0

90.0

- 80.0 -

70.0 - 

60.0 

50.0 - 

40.0 

30.0 

20.0

10.0 - 

5.0

2.0 

1.0 - 

0.5 -

0.2 -

0.1 

0.01

May 6

0.1 1.0 10

DIAMETER, IN MILLIMETERS 

FIGURE 22. Graph showing systematic changes in bed-material size distribution between May 6 and June 3,1958. Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge.

decreasing concentration reflects changes in both the 

wash load and the bed-material load. Generally the 

bed-material concentration decreases less rapidly than 

the fine-material concentration.

Straub and others (1958) found that at a constant 

discharge, a decrease in temperature caused an increase 

in the slope, whereas the velocity and depth remained 

about constant. In a natural sand-bed channel, slope 

usually varies conservatively; hence a change in temperature for a given discharge results in a change in the 

velocity-depth relation. During a rising stage, a high 

bed-material discharge is accompanied by a high 

velocity, low depth, low flow resistance, and low water 

temperature. During receding stages, a lower bedmaterial discharge is accompanied by a low velocity, 

greater depth, greater flow resistance, and higher water 

temperature. In pool-and-riffle channels, temperature 

effects may be further complicated by changes in bedmaterial characteristics and by variations in slope with 

discharge.

Figure 23 shows the ratio of the computed bedmaterial concentration to the concentration from the

velocity-concentration curve for Bernalillo (fig. 18) 

plotted against water temperature. Except in the 

four highest points, which were influenced by tributary 

inflow and are considered unrepresentative, the 

tendency for low ratios to accompany high water 

temperatures is apparent, but the relation is too poorly 

defined to yield a quantitative evaluation of the temperature effects.

Temperature effects would probably be more apparent if ratios were plotted from the q-q? curves in 

figure 16 because, as noted previously, for a given water 

discharge, low temperatures usually accompany high 

sediment discharges, high velocities, and low depths. 

On the other hand, temperature effects on the V-CT relations or on the V-q? relations are complicated by the 

fact that temperature is not independent of flow resistance that is, of the velocity-depth relation for a 

given cross section and a given water discharge.

Temperature is generally considered a factor of 

importance in sediment transport relations, but a 

precise quantitative evaluation of temperature effects 

is not possible, at least insofar as this investigation is
F22 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

40 50 60 70 80 90 

WATER TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES FAHRENHEIT

FIGUBE 23. Plot showing apparent effect of temperature on concentration, Rio 

Grande near Bernalillo, N. Mex.

concerned, for the Rio Grande data because the effects 

of temperature changes cannot be isolated from the 

effects of apparently interrelated changes in other 

variables.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Many variables which influence sediment transport 

were not considered in this report. Studies of some of 

these factors, for the Rio Grande, have been presented 

elsewhere. Culbertson and Dawdy (1964) discussed 

depth-discharge discontinuities, and described the influence of changes in bed configuration and flow regime 

on sediment transport. Nordin and Dempster (1963) 

investigated vertical distributions of velocity and suspended-sediment concentration, and Nordin (1963) 

evaluated the influence of high concentrations of fine 

sediments on the relative concentration distribution of 

suspended sands.

Colby (1961, 1964) investigated many of these factors 

for a wide range of flow conditions, and developed

several graphical relations to be used as a basis for the 

practical computations of bed-material discharge (Colby, 

1964).

So far as the writers know, this report presents the 

first detailed information on the flow characteristics 

and transport relations for reaches of the Rio Grande 

with pool-and-riffle channel configurations and bimodal 

distributions of bed material. Additional studies in 

this area are highly desirable.

Finally, this investigation was of a single southwestern stream with a limited range of flow conditions. 

The findings of this study are probably not applicable 

to other flow conditions, especially to streams of great 

depth.

CONCLUSIONS

Bed-material discharge, computed by the modified 

Einstein method, is related to simple hydraulic variables 

for observations at six sediment stations through a 

110-mile reach of the Rio Grande in New Mexico. 

Transport relations vary in a downstream direction, or 

with decreasing particle size, and fall into two distinct 

groups, one group representing the confined sections 

and the other representing sections without lateral 

restrictions. At low flows, greater sediment loads are 

transported at the narrow sections, while at high flows, 

greater loads are carried at the wide sections. This 

difference reflects the tendency for the wide sections to 

aggrade and channelize at low flows.

Flow characteristics at Otowi, which is the farthest 

upstream station and which has a pool-and-riffle channel 

configuration and a bimodal distribution of bed material, differ markedly from the flow characteristics at 

Bernalillo, which has a sand-bed channel. At Otowi, 

the depth, water-surface slope, bed shear stress, resistance to flow, and bed-material size increase with increasing water discharge. Near Bernalillo, watersurface slope and bed-material characteristics are approximately constant, flow resistance decreases with 

discharge, and the range in bed shear stress, compared 

to that at Otowi, is very limited.

The mean velocity and bed-material discharge for the 

two stations are comparable, and sediment-transport 

rates relate reasonably well to effective shear. However, the variable size distribution of bed material 

introduces considerable scatter in the relation for Otowi. 

Converting the shear-transport relations to a dimensionless form, in which the shear parameter is a measure of 

the ratio of the effective shear to the resistance of the 

topmost layer of the bed, reduces much of the scatter. 

This relation is very similar to the curves developed by 

A. A. Bishop (Sediment transport in alluvial channels: a 

critical examination of Einstein's theory, Colorado State 

Univ. Ph. D. thesis, 1961) to predict total bed-material
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F23

discharge. A qualitative comparison of the Rio Grande 

relations with Bishop's curves indicates that, to be 

generally applicable, the dimensionless shear-transport 

relations for predicting total bed-material transport 

should probably include parameters to explain the 

effects of temperature and flow depth.

In addition, systematic changes in bed-material 

characteristics at Otowi appear to be related to changes 

in transport which are independent of flow variables. 

Changes in the bed material may be caused by some 

selective transport process which depletes material hi

the size range from about 0.5 to 2.0 mm. A single 

representative grain size in the shear-transport relations 

probably does not adequately represent the complex 

bimodal size distribution of sand-gravel channels.

A consideration of water-temperature effects indicates 

that high bed-material discharge is associated with low 

temperatures. However, a quantitative evaluation of 

the influence of temperature was impossible because the 

effects of temperature changes are not independent of 

the effects of changes in flow resistance and in the 

velocity-depth relations.

TABLE 1. Basic hydraulic data with measured and computed sediment concentrations, Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, near San Ildefonso,

N. Mex.

Date

1968 

May6 

May 12 

May 19 

May 26 

1959

1961 

Apr. 26 

May 2... . ....... ......

May 17.. 

July 20 

1968 

Apr. 19 _ -

May 31..... ..... ........

July 2.

Time

1720 

1245 

1720 

1240 

1015 

1045 

1040 

0920 

1030

1145

1310 

1415 

1145 

1440

1245

1350 

1350 

1345

Q (Cfs)

7,320 

9,340 

9,490 

10,100 

8,590 

5,210 

5,000 

2,240 

1,130

1,270

2,780 

4,000 

2,750 

908 

1,090

6,000 

1,460 

684

-B(ft)

132 

130 

145 

140 

135 

129 

125 

113 

234

120

121 

128 

115 

97 

98

130 

112 

109

V (ft per 

sec)

6.84 

7.02 

6.98 

7.08 

7.10 

6.44 

5.56 

4.23 

3.35

3.04

4.34 

4.10 

5.03 

2.82 

3.08

5.88 

3.87 

2.50

-D(ft)

8.11 

10.23 

9.38 

10.21 

8.96 

6.27 

7.19 

4.69 

1.44

3.47

5.30 

7.63 

4.75 

3.32 

3.61

7.85 

3.37 

2.51

S

0.00230 

. .00246 

1.00240 

.00235 

.00240 

.00220 

.00231 

.00163 

.00131

.00144 

.00133 

.00159 

.00072 

.00081

.00196 

.00098 

.00092

T(°F)

59 

58 

62 

61 

62 

60 

62 

67 

72

73

52 

57 

56 

76 

74

59 

59

78

Measured concentration 

of suspended load, ppm

All sizes

7,440 

5,020 

2,390 

2,990 

1,720 

3,180 

1,110 

1,860 

316

24,000

1,350 

2,480 

1,120 

284 

3,590

4,240 

1,660 

203

>0.062 mm

4,960 

2,920 

834 

2,140 

1,240 

2,810 

942 

1,770 

262

2,210

819 

1,180 

829 

146

1,210

2,500 

1,540 

159

Computed total 

concentration, ppm

All sizes

7,790 

6,030 

3,050 

3,540 

2,190 

5,350 

1,860 

2,780 

1,150

24,700

1,830 

2,840 

1,910 

689 

4,380

4,800 

2,740 

488

>0.062 mm

5,310 

3,920 

1,500 

2,700 

1,710 

5,190 

1,690 

2,690 

1,100

2,910

1,300 

1,540 

1,620 

551 

2,000

3,060 

2,620 

445

i Estimated.
F24 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

TABLE 2. Basic hydraulic data with measured and computed sediment concentrations, Rio Grande at Cochiti, N. Mex.

Date

1984 

Mar. 10. 

Mar. 23 

Apr. 7_ ... 

Apr. 20 

May4 ~

May 20. 

July 12....... ... ....... .....

Aug. 10 

Aug. 24. 

Sept. 8 _ - - _ 

Sept. 23 -

Oct. 5.... .....................

Oct. 19... ..... ....... .....

Nov. 17.. .....................

Dec. 29.. 

1988 

Jan. 11 _ ... 

Jan. 26 _____ -.-....-.-....---

Feb. 9.. .........................

Feb. 23.. 

Mar. 8.................. .........

Mar. 22. _ -

Apr. 6. __ ...... ..............

Apr. 19. . ....... .... ..... ..

May 17. 

June 29 _________ _ ....

July 11.. ....................

July 25.... ...... ..............

Aug. 8. - ......... .........

Sept. 6 ________ . ..........

Sept. 19 

Oct. 3..... ..... ............

Oct. 18.. ... .........

Nov. 2...................... ....

Nov. 15.... ..................

Nov. 28. ...... ...... ... ....

Dec. 14. ......... ...

Dec. 27......... .......... ..

1966 

Jan. 24

Feb. 7........ ...................

Feb. 22.... ...............

Mar. 7 .......................

Apr. 3. ___________ ....

Apr. 18.-. __ .... _ ..... _ . ..

May 2 _._._.. ___ __.___

May IS..........................

May 29..... .... _

June 12.. ___ ...... ... ....

June 26 _____ .. . 

July 10....... ...... ....... .......

1987 

May 16.. ............ .......

May 29.... ..... ...... ... . ..

June 26 __________ . ......

1958 

May 7... ........... ..

May 12. .................. .

May 20 

May 26 

June 3..........................

June 9 __________ . _ .

June 12 _________ ... _ .

June 17 ______ __ ... ....

June 24-. ..- __ ........... .

1961 

Apr. 26.. 

May2 _______ 

May 18..-.. .... .... .. ...

June 22 __ ---.----...-........

Time

1200 

1200 

1135 

1135 

1000 

1210 

1160 

1045 

1160 

1145 

1125 

1105 

1205 

1245 

1205 

1330 

1340 

1510

1455 

1515 

1640 

1445 

1410 

1500 

1460 

1310 

1630 

1045 

1205 

1315 

1425 

1425 

1160 

1410 

1500 

1320 

1400 

1260 

1160 

1130 

1100

1130 

1140 

1030 

1220 

1420 

1430 

1530 

1315 

1146 

1345 

1115 

1200

1600 

1500 

1700 

1740

1210 

1560 

1205 

1630 

1315 

1340 

1240 

1205 

1340

1060 

1155 

1160 

1110

Q(ob)

416 

309 

541 

709 

1,170 

1,690 

881 

667 

784 

264 

252 

500 

67.8 

144 

294 

347 

327 

464

464 

468 

603 

517 

529 

414 

154 

272 

1,040 

514 

262 

420 

161 

883 

1,160 

232 

205 

171 

173 

352 

386 

484 

558

555 

583 

478 

938 

964 

919 

1,260 

556 

943 

711 

64.6 

34.7

3,470 

3,350 

5,520 

4,800

7,960 

8,900 

8,920 

9,810 

8,680 

4,990 

5,060 

2,040 

1,000

2,090 

3,680 

2,620 

674

B(ft)

208 

177 

288 

300 

300 

284 

300 

204 

295 

172 

175 

178 

77.0 

88.0 

100 

115 

115 

124

126 

128 

130 

124 

133 

120 

95.0 

114 

280 

164 

90.0 

100 

86.0 

271 

279 

89.0 

90.0 

84.0 

92.0 

135 

104 

114 

125

130 

140 

130 

259 

300 

241 

281 

256 

233 

264 

52.5 

61.0

283 

287 

297 

291

308 

328 

316 

335 

295 

297 

298 

285 

263

285 

288 

281 

280

V (ft per 

sec)

1.70 

1.74 

1.91 

1.94 

2.26 

2.97 

2.19 

1.89 

2.14 

1.50 

1.60 

1.87 

.97 

1.38 

1.84 

2.03 

1.98 

2.27

2.16 

2.14 

2.18 

2.28 

2.29 

2.17 

1.60 

1.84 

2.46 

1.80 

1.66 

2.16 

1.32 

2.68 

2.84 

1.77 

1.65 

1.51 

1.59 

2.03 

2.77 

3.36 

3.15

2.64 

2.67 

2.21 

2.28 

2.23 

2.63 

2.73 

2.31 

3.09 

2.18 

.88 

.63

4.81 

4.65 

5.61 

5.27

6.58 

6.64 

6.51 

a 67 

6.07 

4.62 

4.22 

3.20 

2.23

3.36 

4.54 

3.90 

2.25

D(ft)

1.17 

1.01 

.98 

1.22 

1.73 

1.89 

1.34 

1.73 

1.24 

1.02 

.96 

1.50 

.91 

1.18 

1.60 

1.49 

1.43 

1.65

1.71 

1.71 

1.78 

1.83 

1.74 

1.59 

1.08 

1.30 

1.52 

1.74 

1.76 

1.94 

1.42 

1.22 

1.46 

1.47 

1.38 

1.20 

1.18 

1.28 

1.34 

1.26 

1.42

1.62 

1.56 

1.66 

1.59 

1.44 

1.46 

1.63 

.94 

1.31 

1.23 

1.40 

.90

2.55 

2.51 

3.31 

3.13

3.93 

4.09 

4.34 

4.39 

4.85 

3.64 

4.03 

2.24 

1.71

2.18 

2.82 

2.39 

1.09

S

i 0. 00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

' . 00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

'.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129 

1.00129

1.00129 

.00120 

.00120 

.00127 

.00127 

.00123 

.00113 

.00118 

.00118

.00134 

.00137 

.00137 

.00128

T(°F)

54 

51 

58 

58 

63 

67 

67 

65 

77 

73 

70 

70 

71 

72 

58 

49 

38 

36

37 

36 

40 

38 

49 

49 

53 

58 

60 

75 

72 

75 

81 

76 

71 

74 

70 

63 

52 

42 

40 

36 

39

41 

37 

42 

43 

47 

52 

59 

59 

66 

73 

77 

80

54 

62 

62 

67

55 

58 

58 

61 

63 

62 

63 

70 

75

52 

57 

59 

76

Measured concentration 

f suspended load (ppm)

All sizes

83 

57 

290 

581 

1,780 

2,000 

425 

298 

1,270 

760 

2,920 

3,130 

118 

186 

182 

637 

362 

561

1,030 

792 

670 

422 

640 

300 

66 

261 

2,320 

189 

28 

222 

621 

15,700 

3,340 

623 

924 

170 

192 

1,160 

748 

947 

999

895 

1,260 

3,170 

3,630 

5,000 

5,030 

2,200 

939 

969 

1,060 

36 

30

2,560 

2,770 

5,410 

3,940

6,090 

4,560 

3,110 

3,110 

3,110 

7,670 

8,840 

5,240 

247

1,210 

2,370 

2,760 

153

>0.062mm

45 

11 

32 

105 

392 

800 

191 

179 

152 

352 

29 

31 

37 

41 

107 

382 

261 

381

865 

420 

436 

118 

173 

81 

7 

44 

1,210 

112 

9 

73 

6 

628 

1,740 

137 

388 

126 

156 

974 

568 

701 

739

770 

995 

2,880 

1,780 

3,760 

4,070 

1,210 

639 

669 

901 

15 

2

1,890 

2,240 

4,330 

3,390

3,330 

2,700 

1,980 

2,100 

2,580 

7,170 

8,740 

5,060 

140

713 

1,040 

2,460 

30

Computed total 

concentration (ppm)

All sizes

217 

90 

400 

765 

2,430 

2,630 

711 

434 

1,660 

878 

3,080 

3,530 

212 

239 

351 

1,140 

1,390 

2,030

1,970 

1,580 

1,620 

907 

1,700 

766 

99 

595 

3,360 

301 

65 

396 

644 

16,900 

4,270 

734 

.1,130 

295 

381 

1,890 

1,540 

2,250 

2,000

1,690 

2,120 

3,630 

7,840 

5,760 

5,970 

2,960 

1,940 

2,040 

1,370 

40 

31

3,600 

4,170 

6,310 

5,300

6,980 

6,030 

3,810 

3,490 

3,670 

11,200 

11,500 

7,410 

663

2,130 

3,160 

3,600 

491

>0.062 mm

178 

43 

135 

273 

1,030 

1,400 

469 

314 

499 

472 

149 

639 

129 

92 

276 

877 

1,290 

1,860

1,800 

1,200 

1,390 

598 

1,330 

543 

39 

374 

2,220 

222 

46 

244 

24 

1,410 

2,600 

234 

585 

248 

344 

1,700 

1,360 

2,000 

1,740

1,560 

1,850 

3,350 

5,990 

4,470 

5,000 

1,930 

1,640 

1,730 

1,210 

19r 

2

2,920 

3,630 

5,210 

4,740

4,220 

4,160 

2,680 

2,480 

3,140 

10,700 

11,400 

7,230 

556

1,630 

1,820 

3,300 

304

i Average bed slope from aggradation-degradation studies.
,RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO .F25 

TABLE 3. Basic hydraulic data with measured and computed sediment concentrations, Rio Grande at San Felipe, N. Mex.

Date

1954 

Mar. 10 .. _

Mar. 23 

Apr. 7.. _ 

Apr. 20 

July 12................... ........

Aug. 13.. ......................

Aug. 24.-...--..... ...... .........

Sept. 23. ..... ..... .... . .......

Oct. 5.. _ .......................

Oct. 19 ......................

Nov. 3 ... ...................

Nov. 17 .....................

Nov. 30. 

1965 

Jan. 11... .....................

Feb. 28.. ......................

Mar. 7 

Mar. 22... ....................

May 3.... .......... .........

Mayl7 

June 2 ___ ____ ......

June 29 _ ................. ......

July 11... ...... ............

July 25... .- .... . ......

Sept. 6... ......... ..... .......

Sept. 19 .....................

Oct. 4... ...................

Oct. 19... ..............

Nov. 2.......

Nov. 14..........................

Nov. 28... .......................

Dec. 14........... .

Dec. 27 ....................

1956 

Jan. 10.... _.__ .

Jan. 24.. ......................

Feb. 7 .... 

Feb. 22...........................

Mar. 6.. _ ......................

Mar. 21.. ....................

Apr. 4..........................

Apr. 19.... ...... .. ..

May2 ____ 

May 15. __ ...... ....... ...

May 29 ________ .. ___

June 12.. _ ........ __ ......

July 10.- .....................

July 24. ..

1957 

May 15 . ___

May 28....... .............

June 13. __ __ .. .. __ .

June 28.. __ .... .. _ ... .. .

1958 

May 12... _ .. 

May 21 ......... ............

June9-. ___ ........

June 12. ___ __ . . 

1981 

Apr. 26 

May IS. .. ...........

June22. __ ____ .. ....

Time

1445 

1525 

1500 

1510 

1335 

1515 

1515 

1445 

1510 

1330 

1525 

1400 

1505 

1520 

1445 

1305 

1120 

1025 

1100 

1450

1205 

1555 

1430 

1120 

1155 

1050 

1245 

1500 

1010 

1005 

1405 

1430 

1145 

1500 

1430 

1115 

1435 

1500 

1515 

1335

1510 

1440 

1415 

1345 

1405 

1045 

1425 

1030 

J020 

1615 

1420 

1630 

1415 

1345

1430 

1320 

1100 

1400

1720 

1250 

1335 

1630 

1700 

1710 

1345 

1600

1350 

1535 

1110 

1440

Q (cfs)

457 

414 

562 

762 

1,170 

1,710 

919 

755 

787 

330 

361 

563 

169 

294 

305 

252 

360 

369 

358 

386

485 

515 

581 

480 

446 

1,180 

1,580 

309 

453 

366 

862 

1,140 

264 

206 

235 

273 

372 

426 

497 

615

571 

523 

605 

478 

863 

508 

892 

929 

1,250 

599 

888 

667 

104 

256

3,580 

3,010 

5,160 

4,760

8,200 

9,140 

9,720 

8,590 

5,120 

5,010 

2,200 

1,020

2,200 

3,580 

2,510 

680

B(ft)

153 

153 

153 

212 

225 

276 

266 

223 

262 

145 

198 

176 

90 

150 

150 

166 

172 

172 

172 

75

174 

169 

178 

178 

176 

143 

146 

151 

174 

155 

128 

152 

146 

116 

130 

124 

126 

111 

111 

115

157 

150 

213 

118 

258 

105 

215 

214 

263 

150 

202 

197 

142 

108

140 

144 

150 

149

205 

210 

209 

200 

188 

187 

182 

181

177 

163 

168 

162

V (ft per 

sec)

2.17 

2.00 

2.42 

2.22 

2.58 

3.00 

2.21 

2.25 

2.19 

1.98 

2.20 

2.23 

1.75 

1.81 

1.96 

1.64 

1.83 

2.02 

1.95 

2.80

2.19 

2.27 

2.33 

2.18 

1.67 

2.97 

3.69 

1.77 

1.90 

2.44 

3.13 

3.69 

1.62 

1.84 

1.73 

1.88 

2.21 

2.70 

2.70 

3.03

2.79 

2.78 

3.00 

2.58 

2.61 

2.47 

2.84 

2.88 

3.23 

2.25 

2.57 

2.34 

.85 

1.94

5.19 

5.25 

6.18 

5.96

7.19 

7.43 

7.53 

7.16 

6.06 

5.99 

4.44 

2.60

4.60 

5.49 

4.99 

2.31

-O(ft)

1.38 

1.35 

1.52 

1.62 

2.02 

2.07 

1.56 

1.51 

1.37 

1.15 

.83 

1.43 

1.07 

1.08 

1.04 

.93 

1.15 

1.06 

1.07 

1.84

1.27 

1.34 

1.40 

1.24 

1.52 

2.78 

2.93 

1.16 

1.37 

.97 

2.15 

2.03 

1.12 

.97 

1.05 

1.17 

1.33 

1.42 

1.66 

1.77

1.31 

1.25 

.95 

1.57 

1.28 

1.96 

1.46 

1.50 

1.47 

1.77 

1.71 

1.45 

.86 

1.22

4.93 

3.98

5.57 

5.36

5.56 

5.86 

6.17 

6.00 

4.49 

4.47 

2.73 

2.17

2.70 

4.00 

3.10 

1.76

S

i 0. 00150 

i. 00150 

i. 00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

i. 00150 

1.00150 

i. 90150 

i. 00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

i. 00150 

i. 00150 

1.00150 

i. 00150 

1.00150 

1.00150

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

i. 00150 

1.90150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00)50 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

i. 00150 

i. 00150 

1.00150 

1.00150

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150 

1.00150

.00176 

.00180 

.00193 

.00168 

.00151 

.00151 

.00091 

.00100

.00115 

.00126 

.00108 

.00197

T(°F)

56 

53 

62 

64 

64 

74 

71 

68 

81 

76 

73 

73 

69 

74 

60 

52 

44 

41 

34 

32

36 

47 

48 

42 

59 

57 

70 

76 

71 

71 

84 

74 

70 

73 

64 

44 

52 

44 

40 

40

43 

43 

40 

47 

47 

51 

51 

50 

58 

66 

70 

76 

80 

80

57 

61 

64 

73

59 

65 

67 

67 

66 

66 

75 

80

57 

62 

62 

76

Measured concentration 

of suspended load (ppm)

All sizes

250 

308 

405 

790 

1,770 

2,010 

513 

339 

1,560 

13,500 

12,200 

4,220 

263 

639 

865 

656 

1,280 

849 

954 

1,030

926 

726 

935 

670 

636 

2,370 

3,080 

444 

1,550 

38,300 

35,700 

5,670 

631 

1,170 

712 

2,040 

1,510 

1,440 

1,480 

1,510

1,100 

938 

1,200 

867 

3,870 

916 

1,650 

1,780 

2,170 

2,550 

1,190 

641 

84 

608

3,360 

2,250 

2,670 

2,160

4,410 

2,790 

2,580 

2,430 

6,300 

2,740 

1,100 

577

1,360 

2,890 

1,040 

519

>0.062mm

115 

166 

162 

245 

425 

764 

262 

197 

468 

351 

488 

591 

68 

198 

372 

407 

858 

577 

725 

834

630 

421 

552 

315 

134 

1,040 

2,130 

89 

1,320 

1,150 

2,140 

3,800 

442 

573 

278 

1,530 

846 

893 

1,080 

1,030

781 

732 

792 

685 

1,160 

522 

528 

890 

1,020 

2,170 

702 

397 

3 

91

2,180 

1,780 

1,900 

1,620

2,780 

1,670 

1,550 

1,610 

5,780 

2,400 

898 

418

797 

1,480 

685 

371

Computed total 

concentration (ppm)

All sizes

507 

464 

778 

1,230 

2,260 

3,340 

857 

699 

2,230 

13,600 

13,700 

4,780 

456 

950 

1,200 

1,010 

1,690 

1,470 

1,540 

1,460

1,420 

1,680 

1,820 

1,090 

824 

2,870 

4,260 

579 

1,690 

41,100 

37,000 

6,500 

1,370 

1,540 

1,160 

2,210 

2,100 

2,250 

2,140 

2,280

2,010 

1,890 

2,680 

1,490 

4,900 

1,380 

2,370 

2,660 

3,190 

2,820 

1,830 

1,130 

86 

1,200

3,900 

2,890 

3,400 

3,580

5,330 

3,140 

3,490 

3,130 

8,390 

4,510 

1,820 

1,390

2,100 

4,150 

1,800

877

>0.062 mm

367 

320 

529 

667 

879 

2,090 

596 

553 

1,120 

405 

1,550 

1,080 

256 

496 

681 

748 

1,260 

1,190 

1,280 

1,260

1,120 

1,360 

1,420 

722 

311 

1,530 

3,290 

213 

1,450 

3,410 

3,350 

4,580 

1,180 

924 

719 

1,700 

1,380 

1,680 

1,730 

1,780

1,670 

1,660 

2,260 

1,300 

2,110 

981 

1,230 

1,750 

2,000 

2,430 

1,320 

876 

5 

671

2,710 

2,410 

2,620 

3,030

3.700 

2,020 

2,460 

2,310 

7,880 

4,170 

1,620 

1,230

1,540 

2,740 

1,450 

729

i Average bed slope from aggradation-degradation studies.
F26 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

TABLE 4. Basic hydraulic data with measured and computed sediment concentrations, Rio Grande near Bernalillo, N. Mex.

Date

1952 

Apr 25 .. .. . .

May 12......... ....... ..........

July 24.............. ..........

196S 

Apr. 29........._ .

June 2 ___________ __ .

1966 

Apr. 2................ ...........

Apr. 14............ .......

Apr. 16.. ........... ........

Apr. 21 ......

Apr. 23...........................

May I..... ........ ...... ..

May 12............. ..........

May 14... .. ... ..........

May 18 .

May 22......... .................

May 26. . -_

May 29.- - .

June 12... __ ...._-----... _ ..

Aug. 24..- ....... ..........

Sept. 7 ....................

1957 

Apr. 29- ..

May 13.. - ....... ..........

May 16 _ 

May 27..-..- __.... _____

June 24..---..... __ -.-..-... ...

1958 

May8.. ........ ..........

May 13..... .....................

May 21 _ _

May27 ........ .

June 4 ...........................

June 10 _____________

June 13 __ -----.. __ .... .....

June 25 __ ----...... __ ......

1960 

Feb. 15....... ...................

Apr. 6 ._ _ May 24.... ...................

1961 

Apr. 27....... ....... ............

May3 ...... ......

MayK ...... ........

196g

June 1 _______ . __ .......

Time

1520 

1235 

1615 

1410 

1505 

1430 

1330 

1305 

1415 

1320 

1325 

1330 

1115 

1630 

1120 

1200 

1050 

1230 

1245 

1040 

1140

1500 

1800 

1800 

1555 

1600 

1630

1035 

1035 

1530 

1130 

1145 

1015 

1030 

0945 

1110

1430 

1320 

1220 

0950

1230 

1430 

1120

1315 

1430 

1245

Q(cfe)

2,730 

6,490 

6,140 

4,830 

2,760 

2,060

1,540 

551 

2,570 

2,150 

2,090 

1,340

759 

610 

623 

741 

653 

920 

1,000 

986 

395 

199 

98.4 

564 

573 

496 

493 

612 

479 

186 

270 

17.6 

81.2

1,580 

4,150 

3,080 

2,850 

5,160 

4,570

6,860 

8,320 

8,680 

10,100 

8,160 

5,800 

4,340 

4,000 

6,040

602 

2,100 

1,240 

2,030

2,230 

3,360 

2,260

5,340 

987 

453

-B(ft)

272 

272 

272 

272 

269 

270

270 

265 

270 

270 

270 

268

237 

262 

266 

280 

255 

274 

266 

263 

244 

79.0 

89.0 

262 

171 

260 

214 

294 

160 

46.0 

180 

29.0 

108

275 

271 

272 

271 

271 

271

270 

271 

270 

273 

272 

270 

266 

267 

273

128 

269 

133 

268

267 

270 

268

276 

223

227

V (ft per 

sec)

4.06 

6.57 

5.96 

5.09 

3.71 

2.84

2,65 

1.66 

3.58 

3.11 

3,12 

2.34

2.23 

1.98 

1.91 

2.05 

1.94 

2.37 

2.51 

2.90 

1.44 

1.70 

1.40 

2.01 

1.97 

1.85 

1.76 

1.89 

1.76 

2.09 

1.62 

1.17 

1.30

3.73 

5.00 

5.17 

4.31 

5.86 

5.56

6.91 

6.88 

7.82 

7.71 

6.92 

6.27 

6.10 

5.06 

6.50

2.55 

3.04 

2.71 

2.89

3.16 

3.99 

3.62

6.01

2.88 

2.00

D(tt)

2.46 

3.63 

3.79 

3.49 

2.76 

2.69

2.15 

1.25 

2.66 

2.56 

2.48 

2.14

1.44 

1.18 

1.23 

1.29 

1.32 

1.42 

1.50 

1.29 

1 12 

1.48 

.79 

1.07 

1.70 

1.03 

1.31 

1.10 

1.70 

1.94 

.93 

.52 

.58

1.54 

3.06 

2.19 

2.44 

3.25 

3.03

3.68 

4.46 

4.11 

4.80 

4.34 

3.43 

2.67 

2.96 

3.40

1.84 

2.56 

3.44 

2.93

2.64 

3.12 

2.33

3.22 

1.54 

1.00

S

0.00089 

.00084 

.00083 

.00079 

.00076 

.00080

1.00086 

1.00086 

.00093 

1.00086 

.00083 

.00086

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086

1.00086 

1.00086 

1.00086 

i 00086 

1.00086 

1.00086

.00080 

.00080 

.00079 

.00080 

.00083 

.00074 

.00076 

.00076 

.00080

1.00086 

.00083 

.00083 

.00082

.00083 

.00083 

.00085

.00086 

.00080 

.00079

T(°F)

58 

62 

70 

72 

70 

75

57 

63 

65 

71 

62 

69

47 

51 

62 

65 

64 

61 

69 

66 

61 

75 

71 

71 

66 

75 

72 

78 

73 

80 

81 

79 

76

59 

58 

60 

64 

65 

73

58 

60 

67 

74 

67 

65 

63 

67 

73

44 

59 

65

74

57 

66 

63

64 

71 

79

Measured concentration 

of suspended load (ppm)

All sizes

3,320 

3,160 

1,990 

1,690 

1,040 

2,490

2,450 

554 

2,530 

2,010 

1.600 

1,060

3,560 

1,840 

2,360 

2,100 

3,330 

3,890 

2,600 

1,120 

2,040 

319 

199 

1,720 

4,410 

926 

1,010 

2,090 

718 

3,820 

3,350 

855 

1,000

3,680 

6,320 

4,460 

2,540 

3,570 

1,900

4,420 

4,740 

3,400 

3,040 

2,580 

3,480 

2,080 

5,980 

5,410

1,430 

1,900 

1,200 

781

1,790 

2,670 

1,250

4,360 

1,720 

185

>0.062mm

1,860 

2,120 

1,550 

1,320 

853 

872

735 

288 

835 

724 

672 

615

2,140 

589 

920 

672 

2,060 

2,100 

1,010 

549 

857 

128 

105 

688 

3,700 

444 

465 

1,250 

323 

2,250 

402 

68 

60

2,240 

4,040 

3,120 

1,730 

2,610 

1,290

2,480 

3,180 

2,240 

2,070 

1,880 

2,850 

1,710 

2,930 

3,950

940 

950 

768 

523

1,150 

1,320 

755

2,000 

1,490 

73

Computed total 

concentration (ppm)

All sizes

4,640 

5,390 

2,590 

2,710 

1,700 

2,860

3,190 

809 

3,400 

2,750 

2,220 

1,640

4,030 

2,390 

2,790 

2,700 

4,510 

4,710 

3,450 

1,900 

2,520 

452 

347 

2,600 

7,950 

1,490 

1,320 

3,240 

970 

5,040 

3,750 

1,000 

1,140

5,460 

8,140 

6,430 

3,640 

5,120 

3,080

5,860 

6,050 

6,240 

3,920 

3,510 

4,570 

3,990 

7,460 

7,240

1,760 

2,430 

1,720 

1,170

2,290 

3,400 

1,310

5,250 

2,960 

410

>0.062 mm

3,130 

4,330 

2,150 

2,340 

1,520 

1,260

1,470 

544 

1,710 

1,460 

1,290 

1,200

2,570 

1,100 

1,310 

1,230 

3,210 

2,880 

1,810 

1,310 

1,310 

261 

262 

1,520 

7,240 

985 

759 

2,370 

562 

3,460 

741 

200 

183

4,160 

5,830 

5,050 

2,810 

4,140 

2,460

3,930 

4,500 

5,080 

2,940 

2,800 

3,950 

3,610 

4,390 

5,760

1,270 

1,480 

1,280 

894

1,640 

2,040 

934

3,160 

2,730 

315

1 Average of observed water-surface slopes.
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F27 

TABLE 5. Basic hydraulic data with measured and computed sediment concentrations, Rio Grande at Albuquerque, N. Mex.

Date

1954 

Mar. 8 

Mar. 11.. _ - 

Mar. 26 

Apr. 19.... .................

Apr. 22.........................

May 6...........................

May 21.. ........................

June 4 _______ ............

June 14 ____ . .................

June 18 ____ __ ____ .

July 12____ ... ...

July 27....... .................

Aug. 10. . .

Aug. 24..........................

Sept. 7. . 

Oct. 4. ..........................

Oct. 18... .... ....... .....

Nov. 2...........................

Nov. 16..........................

1955 

Jan. 10 

Jan. 24...........................

Feb. 25 

Mar. 7 . 

Mar. 22.................... ...

Apr. 4.. ......... ....... .........

May 31.. .- - 

June 13.. __ __________

June 27.. ___ .. ___ ..........

Julyll 

July 25........ ........ ...........

Aug. 11... 

Aug. 23 

Sept. 6 ___ ...... ..........

Sept. 19_ ... ...

Oct. 4.. .........................

Dec. 12..........................

Dec. 27. . .................

1956 

Jan. 9 _ -.-- _ ... __ ------.---.

Jan. 23..... ....... ...........

Feb. 7 ... ... 

Feb. 20 . 

July 20..... ... ... 

1957 

May 14....... ...................

May 27 

June 10 .. 

June 24 __ ____ ..........

Time

0930 

1010 

1045 

1150 

1010 

1110 

1010 

1330 

1030 

1620 

1045 

1025 

1100 

1000 

1035 

1025 

1000 

0900 

1545 

1030 

1630 

1440 

1610 

1125 

1430

1305 

1150 

0925 

1350 

1315 

.0950 

1420 

1120 

1400 

1220 

1345 

1330 

1400 

1130 

1215 

1510 

1445 

1430 

1450 

1430

1545 

1555 

1545 

1600 

1200

1515 

1210 

1245 

1545

Q(cfs)

268 

101 

670 

386 

128 

721 

429 

1,420 

635 

1,420 

1,300 

388 

318 

427 

68.8 

C23 

172 

236 

1,040 

366 

71.9 

81.0 

23.9 

247 

348

444 

242 

558 

395 

293 

132 

281 

902 

205 

73.7 

143 

265 

2,520 

1,380 

791 

51.0 

101 

406 

430 

602

582 

605 

676 

570 

3,750

4,030 

3,040 

5,500 

5,050

B(ft)

77.0 

84.0 

333 

338 

96.0 

362 

136 

332 , 

340 

333 

350 

115 

130 

135 

55.0 

172 

96.0 

103 

246 

128 

31.5 

58.0 

26.0 

154 

178

236 

135 

355 

155 

159 

87.0 

98.0 

400 

96.0 

78.0 

110 

97.0 

327 

325 

327 

71.0 

110 

155 

133 

169

149 

166 

186 

224 

332

320 

320 

324 

325

V (ft per 

sec)

1.99 

.99 

1.83 

1.63 

1.16 

1.90 

2.03 

2.72 

1.69 

2.61 

2.15 

1.63 

1.89 

1.89 

1.64 

2.00 

1.31 

1.69 

3.18 

1.98 

1.67 

1.52 

1.30 

1.87 

1.71

1.92 

1.70 

1.86 

1.88 

1.60 

1.37 

2.01 

1.88 

1.40 

1.40 

1.13 

1.80 

3.91 

3.45 

1.67 

1.21 

1.39 

2.01 

2.04 

1.92

2.24 

2.63 

2.59 

1.93 

4.08

4.17 

3.96 

4.20 

3.37

-O(ft)

1.75 

1.21 

1.10 

.70 

1.15 

1.05 

1.55 

1.57 

1.10 

1.63 

1.73 

2.07 

1.29 

1.67 

.76 

1.52 

1.36 

1.36 

1.33 

1.45 

1.37 

.92 

.71 

.86 

1.14

.98 

1.05 

.85 

1.35 

1.15 

1.11 

1.43 

1.20 

1.52 

.67 

1.15 

1.52 

1.97 

1.23 

1.45 

.59 

.66 

1.30 

1.59 

1.85

1.74

1.39 

1.40 

1.32

2.77

3.02 

2.40 

4.04 

4.62

S 1

0.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110

.00110 

.00110 

.00110 

.00110

T(°F)

44 

49 

47 

57 

51 

62 

58 

65 

63 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

61 

81 

82 

70 

75 

71 

78 

64 

57 

48 

42

37 

34 

35 

50 

47 

45 

58 

63 

60 

61 

72 

72 

76 

75 

73 

67 

68 

49 

42 

48

48 

43 

45 

50 

70

62 

65 

67 

75

Measured concentration 

of suspended load (ppm)

All sizes

659 

588 

2,890 

2,520 

572 

2,220 

1,250 

3,780 

1,320 

3,190 

2,450 

523 

510 

635 

307 

5,970 

2,970 

9,370 

56,300 

19,600 

2,390 

1,830 

525 

1,780 

1,560

1,720 

893 

2,030 

1,260 

947 

672 

1,630 

1,800 

1,070 

211 

351 

14,600 

49,800 

39,800 

3,960 

107 

1,420 

1,310 

1,900 

2,680

2,210 

1,910 

4,130 

3,090 

62,300

9,490 

3,910 

5,540 

8,490

>0.062mm

165 

6 

578 

227 

29 

577 

325 

643 

264 

510 

588 

120 

168 

254 

227 

239 

89 

94 

1,130 

784 

96 

55 

32 

142 

218

413 

277 

731 

164 

104 

27 

244 

468 

749 

34 

42 

584 

3,980 

1,190 

990 

5 

28 

236 

513 

858

597 

707 

1,240 

1,050 

3,740

6,260 

2,740 

3,930 

7,470

Computed total 

concentration (ppm)

All sizes

967 

598 

3,420 

3,060 

613 

2,540 

1,480 

4,670 

1,650 

3,770 

'2,930 

612 

766 

958 

732 

6,510 

3,080 

9,510 

58,800 

21,700 

2,600 

2,070 

601 

2,170 

1,880

2,350 

1,230 

3,060 

1,520 

1,130 

710 

2,050 

2,210 

1,140 

327 

414 

15,100 

51,800 

42,300 

5,930 

155 

1,560 

1,680 

2,230 

3,060

2,720 

2,900 

5,440 

3,850 

67,700

10,800 

4,930 

6,610 

9,500

>0.062 mm

466 

6 

1,060 

729 

63 

851 

539 

1,450 

572 

1,060 

1,040 

204 

415 

574 

651 

700 

149 

94 

2,900 

2,640 

274 

252 

99 

509 

505

996 

594 

1,730 

406 

268 

53 

637 

831 

816 

140 

97 

1,070 

5,820 

3,080 

2,920 

53 

143 

570 

807 

1,210

1,060 

1,650 

2,460 

1,420 

6,820

7,550 

3,730 

4,990 

8,470

Average bed slope from aggradation-degradation studies.
F28 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

TABLE 6. Basic hydraulic data with measured and computed sediment concentrations, Rio Grande near Belen, N. Mex.

Date

1954 

Mar. 22 ___ . ___ ..... ........

Apr. 6 ...........................

June 28 --._ ..-._._ . ___

July 12...... __ .. __ . _ ... ...

Aug. 10.. ... ...............

Oct. 19.... ....................

Nov. 16.... _______ .........

1966 

Jan. 12... __ . __ .... _ .......

Jan. 25 ____ .... _ ...... .____

Feb. 9... .....................

Feb. 24...........................

Mar. 9.. ____ ... .... _

Mar. 25..........................

May 20. 

Aug. 23. ______ ..............

1967 

May 15..........................

May 27..........................

June 24 _______________

Time

1405 

1510 

1810 

1410 

1345 

1430 

1515 

1345 

1520 

1625 

1510

1235 

1210 

1350 

1445 

1635 

1600 

1625 

1145 

1520

1500 

1230 

1410

Q(cfe)

94.4 

213 

404 

188 

143 

74.4 

47.9 

108 

37.4 

86.4 

164

543 

316 

454 

382 

184 

103 

459 

651 

1,180

3,790 

2,950 

4,200

-B(ft)

82.0 

104 

265 

150 

53.0 

45.0 

66.0 

72.0 

39.0 

61.0 

65.0

204 

117 

208 

161 

86.0 

98.0 

272 

207 

258

390 

395 

395

V (ft per 

sec)

1.09 

1.61 

1.66 

1.11 

1.16 

1.58 

1.06 

1.58 

1.23 

1.05 

1.72

1.74 

2.00 

1.54 

1.78 

1.63 

1.32 

1.57 

2.54 

2.93

3.79 

3.50 

4.16

D(ft)

1.05 

1.27 

.92 

1.13 

2.32 

1.04 

.68 

.95 

.77 

1.35 

1.46

1.53 

1.35 

1.42 

1.33 

1.31 

.80 

1.08 

1.24 

1.56

2.56 

2.14 

2.56

S»

0.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069 

.00069

.00069 

.00069 

.00069

T(°F)

55 

64 

77 

71 

68 

75 

78 

79 

74 

63 

53

38 

40 

41 

45 

57 

60 

73 

76 

79

61

64 

75

Measured concentration 

of suspended load (ppm)

All sizes

248 

702 

1,080 

217 

320 

149 

123 

14,100 

68 

1,400 

1,460

1,750 

1,240 

1,380 

1,120 

676 

277 

2,190 

23,900 

27,100

7,960 

5,210 

3,200

>0.062mm

15 

63 

119 

4 

144 

34 

27 

141 

7 

28 

15

262 

223 

262 

224 

88 

24 

153 

478 

542

3,580 

2,240 

1,730

Computed total 

concentration (ppm)

All sizes

260 

832 

1,340 

229 

394 

245 

162 

15,400 

98 

1,440 

1,540

2,010 

1,590 

1,680 

1,470 

827 

334 

2,500 

25,200 

28,400

9,320 

6,390 

4,330

>0.062 mm

24 

176 

371 

11 

199 

128 

63 

1,270 

35 

48 

81

497 

558 

549 

557 

229 

87 

407 

1,350 

1,500

4,890 

3,350 

2,820

1 Average bed slope from aggradation-degradation studies.

TABLE 7. Particle-size analyses of bed material, Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, near San Ildefonso, N. Mex.

[Method of analysis: 8, sieve; V, visual accumulation tube]

Date

1958 

May 6................. ...........

May 12.. .__. 

May 19..... ......... .

May 26...........................

June 17 _ _ __ 

June 24 ».. ... ..................

1959 

Aug. 8 __ . 

1961 

Apr. 25..... ..................

May 17 .-.-.......-.......

June 21 _____ .. __ ..........

July 20.... ....................

1962 

Apr. 19 _ . __ ...

May 31............... ....

July 2........... ..................

Sampling 

points

1 

1 

2 

1 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

5

5 

5 

4 

6 

5

6 

6 

6

Water 

temperature (°F)

59 

58 

62 

61 

62 

60 

62 

61 

72

73

52 

57 

56 

76

74

59 

59

78

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

0.7 

.3 

.2 

.2 

.1 

1.1 

.1 

2.2 

.1

1.5

0 

.1 

.1

.2

.4 

.1 

.1

0.125

3.8 

1.2 

1.0 

2.2 

.6 

5.0 

.5 

8.4 

.4

8.7

.1 

.2 

.3 

.2 

.4

1.1 

.2 

.1

0.250

33.2 

10.3 

8.9 

30.9 

11.2 

16.3 

9.8 

30.5 

4.1

34.9

3.1 

3.5 

23.0 

4.4 

3.2

6.8 

23.8 

5.9

0.500

94.8 

66.3 

47.5 

64.8 

34.5 

45.7 

54.7 

57.0 

26.8

76.0

15.7 

21.2 

71.7 

43.7 

35.8

25.8 

72.1 

46.8

1.000

99.5 

96.6 

76.3 

80.9 

42.1 

66.6 

74.3 

74.5 

36.6

92.1

40.5 

54.0 

85.7 

73.5 

74.0

46.2 

87.7 

80.4

2.000

100 

98.8 

92.1 

86.8 

50.6 

85.8 

81.3 

87.8 

39.8

96.9

57.9 

75.7 

96.5 

83.5 

91.2

58.2 

92.9 

92.8

4.000

99.5 

97.8 

89.9 

61.2 

96.8 

84.9 

94.9 

42.3

98.6

72.1 

89.2 

99.6 

89.2 

97.3

67.1 

95.9 

97.3

8.000

100 

98.9 

93.7 

70.6 

99.2 

88.7 

98.1 

47.1

100

85.2 

96.0 

99.9 

93.5 

99.7

75.6 

98.5 

98.8

16.00

loo

100 

89.5 

100 

100 

99.5 

54.1

95.8 

99.2 

100 

95.6 

100

87.4 

99.5 

99.4

32.00

100

100 

72.2

100 

100

100

100 

100 

100

Method 

of 

analysis

8 

8 

S 

S 

8 

S 

8 

S 

8

S

8 

S 

V 

8 

8

8 

S 

S

1 100 percent <64mm.
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO P29

TABLE 8. Particle-size analyses of bed material, Rio Grande at Cochiti, N. Mex. 

[Method of analysis: 8, seive; V, visual accumulation tube]

Date

1954 

Mar. 10... _ 

Mar. 23. 

Apr. 7 ... ... ... 

Apr. 20 

May 4......... ....... ....... . 

July 12....... 

Aug. 10 

Aug. 24.. 

Sept. 23.... 

Oct. 5....... ............. 

Oct. 19....... .......... .....

Nov. 17 

Dec. 29 ... . ........... 

1956 

Jan. 11.............. ...........

Jan. 26.... ...... ...... ...... 

1955 

Feb. 9......... .............

Feb.23 ........................

Mar. 8.......... ............

Apr. 19 ....... .

May 17.. 

July 11.......... ...... .......

Aug. 8 »_.__ 

Sept. 6 .. 

Sept. 19.. ........................

Oct. 3............................

Oct. 18... 

Nov. 2_. _ ......................

Nov. 15.... ....... ............

Nov. 28.... .... . ...... .......

Dec. 14...........................

Dec. 27. 

1956 

Jan. 24..............

Feb. 7........ .... . ......

Feb. 22 ........... . ....

Mar. 7 ... ..... ..... ...

Apr. 3............................

Apr. 18 

MaylS.. 

May 29 _______ .... .

July 10.. ... ...... ...

1957 May 16... .

May 29 

June 26 .... .... .

1958 

May 7 ___ ____ .. .. ..

May 12 ________ .. .. . .

May 20 L.. ___ . . .

May 26 

June 3 __ ___ ..............

June 12 ..............

June 17 ________ ....

June 24 .......................

1961 

Apr. 26... ...........

May 2 _ ............ ..

MaylS ..............

June 22 » ____ ...

Sampling 

points

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

1 

2 

1 

4 

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3

2

3 

3 

6 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

6 

6 

6 

6

Water 

temperature

(OJf)

54 

51 

58 

58 

63 

67 

67 

65 

77 

73 

70 

70 

71 

72 

58 

49 

38 

36

37 

36

40 

38 

49 

49 

53 

58 

60 

75 

72 

75 

81 

76 

71 

74 

70 

63 

52 

42 

40 

36 

39

41 

37 

42 

43 

47 

52 

59 

59 

66 

73 

77 

80

54 

62 

62 "67

55 

58 

58 

61 

63 

62 

63 

70 

75

52 

57 

59 

76

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

0.0 

.0 

.1 

.5 

.2 

.4 

.4 

.2 

.5 

.5 

2.2 

1.5 

4.9 

.4 

2.3 

.3 

.2 

.1

.0 

.0

.1 

.2 

.0 

.1 

.1 

.1 

.3 

.2 

.1 

.2 

.2 

2.2 

1.2 

.8 

.6 

1.2 

.4 

.3 

.3 

.2 

.2

.0 

.2 

.1 

.1 

.2 

.5 

.8 

.2 

.4 

.5 

2.0 

.5

.8 

.2 

4 

.3

.4 

.4 

.6 

2.6 

.1 

.1 

.1 

.2 

.1

.1 

.2 

.1 

.2

0.125

0.1 

.1 

.3 

2.1 

1.2 

4.1 

4.4 

3.4 

3.1 

2.7 

9.2 

3.8 

19.8 

2.1 

11.9 

2.2 

.7 

.4

.7 

1.0

1.0 

.8 

.2 

.2 

.2 

.6 

2.5 

2.3 

2.3 

4.3 

.8 

5.2 

7.2 

4.3 

6.3 

8.4 

5.3 

2.3 

3.4 

2.7 

3.2

1.6 

1.6 

2.0 

1.3 

1.1 

3.4 

7.2 

3.1 

3.1 

6.4 

13.8 

7.9

5.8 

1.5 

1.8 

1.5

2.7 

2.3 

3.7 

15.9 

.7 

1.0 

.6 

1.1 

.5

.9 

1.6 

.5 

.8

0.250

6.1 

12.3 

3.4 

9.0 

9.4 

35.2 

34.5 

32.9 

47.1 

31.5 

39.9 

28.9 

36.6 

15.8 

24.3 

14.2 

7.2 

4.6

6.9 

7.3

6.7 

4.0 

3.4 

3.0 

2.1 

3.6 

10.3 

36.7 

42.4 

72.8 

19.3 

24.1 

25.4 

16.5 

28.4 

52.4 

51.3 

20.4 

27.8 

19.3 

18.3

16.0 

17.7 

23.6 

10.3 

6.9 

35.8 

49.1 

44.8 

27.9 

37.9 

48.4 

23.3

50.4 

21.5 

23.0 

18.5

25.4 

17.0 

23.9 

43.4 

10.3 

11.6 

8.7 

12.7 

8.0

34.0 

23.1 

22.3 

11.3

0.500

55.9 

40.2 

19.8 

26.2 

40.3 

69.8 

76.3 

65.4 

94.3 

93.3 

96.3 

88.9 

89.4 

82.0 

92.3 

86.5 

73.8 

77.6

79.1 

87.6

78.7 

55.7 

50.2 

36.1 

39.4 

47.2 

35.3 

84.4 

89.7 

99.1 

66.8 

63.7 

81.0 

53.1 

71.7 

78.2 

92.8 

64.2 

96.5 

93.9 

79.9

76.8 

65.1 

74.9 

52.4 

58.1 

75.3 

63.9 

88.5 

65.6 

66.2 

82.0 

90.8

94.2 

85.5 

68.5 

90.6

64.2 

59.7 

45.2 

63.7 

44.2 

42.8 

39.8 

54.5 

38.2

73.0 

56.6 

60.7 

34.3

1.000

86.3 

70.8 

36.5 

43.3 

75.6 

81.0 

85.8 

71.4 

96.5 

96.2 

98.6 

96.0 

94.6 

91.7 

98.2 

97.6 

96.7 

94.3

97.1 

96.3

95.7 

85.2 

86.4 

76.7 

76.5 

85.0 

67.8 

93.0 

97.4 

99.8 

85.4 

74.1 

89.4 

78.0 

84.5 

85.7 

99.0 

84.7 

99.4 

98.0 

99.1

95.8 

82.2 

93.3 

85.6 

81.6 

91.0 

76.5 

93.8 

79.9 

77.8 

94.8 

98.2

99.6 

99.1 

91.9 

99.4

72.0 

69.9 

57.1 

66.4 

57.4 

66.9 

66.0 

81.1 

59.9

90.0 

79.4 

73.1 

49.2

2.000

96.8 

87.7 

45.6 

54.0 

90.4 

88.5 

92.1 

78.9 

97.8 

97.4 

99.2 

98.5 

97.2 

96.6 

98.9 

99.2 

98.5 

99.3

99.2 

97.6

98.3 

89.8 

95.6 

90.0 

91.0 

96.3 

88.4 

97.7 

99.2 

100 

96.2 

82.7 

92.9 

88.5 

88.6 

91.9 

99.4 

92.4 

99.7 

99.3 

100

98.8 

89.0 

97.5 

95.0 

92.4 

95.7 

85.5 

95.1 

89.7 

85.4 

98.2 

99.3

99.9 

99.7 

96.8 

99.7

77.7 

77.0 

62.7 

66.7 

66.4 

79.6 

80.8 

92.7 

75.2

95.3 

89.4 

80.1 

55.2

4.000

99.3 

96.4 

52.1 

61.1 

95.9 

93.4 

96.4 

87.3 

98.6 

98.2 

99.4 

99.5 

98.8 

99.0 

99.6 

99.7 

99.5 

99.8

99.8 

98.5

99.3 

94.6 

98.1 

95.9 

96.7 

99.1 

95.9 

99.1 

99.8

98.9 

87.0 

95.2 

94.3 

91.3 

97.1 

99.8 

97.2 

99.8 

99.8

99.3 

94.3 

99.1 

97.6 

97.4 

98.2 

91.2 

97.6 

95.3 

93.4 

99.6 

99.8

100 

99.9 

98.8 

99.8

82.7 

83.2 

69.1 

66.8 

72.4 

87.5 

84.6 

95.3 

83.6

97.8 

93.0 

86.1 

59.6

8.000

99.9 

99.4 

61.2 

69.8 

98.8 

96.0 

98.9 

95.1 

99.4 

98.9 

99.8 

100 

100 

99.9 

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

99.7

100 

99.0 

99.2 

99.2 

99.2 

99.8 

98.8 

99.7 

100

99.6 

89.0 

97.4 

97.1 

93.7 

99.5 

100 

99.1 

100 

100

99.5 

97.1 

99.9 

98.8 

99.6 

99.5 

94.8 

98.5 

97.9 

98.0 

99.9 

100

166

99.5 

100

86.6 

88.9 

74.5 

66.8 

78.9 

94.4 

87.4 

98.2 

90.1

99.0 

95.6 

91.7 

66.6

16.00

100 

100 

82.0 

85.9 

100 

99.0 

100 

99.5 

100 

100 

100

100

100

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100

99.9 

91.2 

99.3 

100 

97.8 

100

100

100 

99.0 

100 

99.7 

100 

100 

99.6 

99.2 

99.8 

100 

100

100

93.4 

96.5 

78.1 

100 

85.5 

96.9 

90.0 

99.3 

96.2

99.8 

98.6 

96.6 

79.7

32.00

100 

100

100

100

100 

93.0 

100

100

100

100

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

83.8

100 

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100 

98.5

Method 

of 

analysis

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S

1 100 percent <64mm.
F30 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS 

TABLE 9. Particle-size analyses of bed material, Rio Grande at San Felipe, N. Mex.

Date

1954 

Mar. 10 ______ _ . .......

Mar. 23..... - .......... .......

Apr. 20 ___ ....... ___ . __ .

May 20.. _______ .. __ __ ....

July 12............ ............

Aug. 13..... .... ........-...

Aug. 24..... ......................

Sept. 8--.-. ____ - ____ . ...

Sept. 23..........................

Oct. 5... _ . _ ... ___ .. .......

Oct. 19-.. ... ... ..... ..

Nov. 3....... ___ ... ____ . ...

Nov. 17..... _ . ___ ... ........

Nov. 30.... _____ - __ . ___ ..

Dec. 30. __ . ____ . _ .......

1955 

Jan. 11---. ____ .... __ ......

Feb. 28 __ . _______ ... __ .

Mar. 7__.. ._ _______

Mar. 22.. ___________ . ...

May3._ __ . _______ .......

Mavl7 ___ . _____ . ___ .

July 11.. ____ . ____ . ......

July 25.. ___ . __ .............

Sept. 19... . . ............

Oct. 4.. .......................

Oct. 19.-- ____ . _____ ..

Nov. 2..... ____ . _ ... __ ....

Nov. 14.... _ ....................

Nov. 28.... ___ .. __ . _ . __ .

Dec. 14 _

Dec. 27 ... .....................

1956 

Jan. 10. .......................

Jan. 24 __ ............ ...........

Feb. 7 .... . ... ..... .... .... ...

Feb. 22... ............. ...........

Mar. 6. _ 

Mar. 21.- 

Apr. 4... ..................

Apr. 19 

May 2.. ______

May 29 1 - _.. _ ..... .......

June 12 - _ _ _ _

July 10. . ... .... 

July 24. ...... ......._........_

1967 

M&y 15..... ......................

May 28 __ _.....................

June 13 ______________

1958 

May 12 _ --..-_. _ ... _ . _ . ___

May21». .... ......... ......

May 26 _ _. 

June 9 . _.__ ___

June 12 . . ..____._... .......

June 17 ........___..___.....

June 24.. _ ..........____.. ___...

1961 

Apr. 26 _____ __.__ ______ ..___

May2__ ..... . ..... ... . 

May 18 _ ........... .............

June22 1 _- _ _ 

Sampling 

points

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

2 

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3

6 

6 

6 

6

Water 

temperature (OF)

56 

53 

62 

64 

64 

74 

71 

68 

81 

76 

73 

73 

69 

74 

60 

52 

44 

41 

34 

32

36 

47 

48 

42 

59 

57 

70 

76 

71 

71 

84 

74 

70 

73 

64 

44 

52 

44 

40 

40

43 

43

40 

47 

47 

51 

51 

50 

58 

66 

70 

76 

80 

80

57 

61 

64 

73

59 

65 

67 

67 

66 

66 

75 

80

57 

62 

62 

76

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

0.1 

.2 

.1 

.2 

.2 

.2 

.2 

.1 

.2 

2.0 

12.7 

.9 

.4 

.4 

.7 

1.2 

.7 

.4 

2.1 

.2

.8 

.2 

.1 

.7 

.9 

.7 

1.0 

.1 

.4 

.6 

1.0 

1.0 

.4 

.7 

.6 

1.4 

.7 

1.5 

.2 

.8

.5 

4.4 

1.6 

.4 

.8 

.6 

.9 

.4 

1.5 

.4 

.4 

.6 

1.1 

.1

.5 

2.0 

.2 

.3

2.6 

.3 

.2 

.1 

.1 

1.2 

.3 

.1

.4 

.1 

.1 

.3

0.125

0.6 

.9 

.9 

1.0 

1.2 

.8 

2.3 

1.0 

1.9 

5.5 

33.3 

4.4 

1.8 

2.1 

5.5 

8.8 

6.3 

2.9 

11.0 

2.2

5.2 

1.1 

1.4 

6.4 

2.3 

3.9 

8.4 

1.7 

2.9 

2.1 

5.4 

6.0 

3.0 

2.2 

3.0 

6.1 

7.7 

7.7 

2.3 

5.4

5.1 

23.8 

13.9 

4.2 

4.8 

5.7 

5.1 

3.6 

8.4 

3.7 

2.9 

5.4 

5.1 

.5

2.7 

6.7 

1.8

.7

6.1 

2.0 

.9 

1.0 

.8 

2.5 

2.1 

.8

3.4

2.5 

5.4 

1.0

0.250

19.2 

14.8 

19.5 

11.7 

13.8 

6.3 

25.8 

19.7 

27.9 

13.9 

73.1 

16.8 

14.6 

12.7 

24.2 

51.2 

30.3 

17.2 

41.8 

23.5

31.2 

12.9 

14.5 

40.4 

11.7 

21.2 

39.6 

13.8 

15.3 

14.8 

22.5 

29.0 

21.9 

7.1 

10.8 

25.2 

33.2 

36.1 

11.9 

29.5

40.2 

65.5 

63.9 

32.3 

17.7 

55.3 

28.8 

30.1 

40.1 

24.1 

18.1 

39.1 

29.5 

3.2

28.9 

40.9 

31.2 

6.2

13.4 

31.1 

9.0 

9.6 

12.5 

14.5 

21.9 

9.3

58.2 

41.2 

54.8 

12.3

0.500

71.7 

45.6 

71.5 

76.2 

48.5 

50.0 

77.4 

70.5 

84.3 

57.0 

90.2 

57.5 

75.6 

62.6 

53.1 

70.5 

80.6 

72.8 

79.2 

80.0

59.9 

76.5 

86.5 

73.8 

46.5 

67.0 

98.0 

67.3 

59.7 

68.9 

55.8 

68.7 

77.5 

44.6 

47.1 

75.1 

93.0 

87.3 

62.8 

76.0

86.5 

91.4 

98.2 

79.4 

50.6 

96.9 

67.1 

88.1 

78.4 

68.9 

70.7 

87.4 

81.8 

41.5

65.9 

86.8 

65.3 

34.6

23.8 

50.9 

27.0 

44.9 

48.7 

40.7 

59.2 

47.3

94.0 

79.2 

82.7 

58.5

1.000

93.0 

61.4 

84.0 

98.4 

78.9 

84.2 

93.2 

94.0 

96.9 

85.3 

97.0 

89.8 

94.9 

84.3 

84.8 

86.3 

94.8 

91.0 

93.9 

93.0

78.1 

94.8 

98.7 

91.3 

73.4 

85.5 

99.6 

94.6 

83.2 

90.3 

74.9 

85.3 

93.7 

94.3 

92.6 

94.9 

98.1 

98.2 

91.7 

96.0

97.4 

94.0 

99.9 

96.8 

58.0 

99.3 

93.1 

98.2 

82.2 

83.5 

88.6 

96.9 

95.3 

83.6

72.6 

99.0 

71.5 

65.4

33.6 

51.6 

48.1 

66.6 

81.9 

50.0 

80.2 

65.2

99.9 

88.7 

86.0 

82.5

2.000

98.5 

68.7 

89.3 

99.6 

95.3 

93.3 

97.3 

98.1 

99.1 

94.3 

99.3 

98.3 

98.4 

94.3 

95.7 

95.0 

98.5 

97.1 

97.7 

98.7

89.1 

97.4 

99.4 

95.7 

87.4 

91.9 

99.8 

98.5 

93.6 

94.2 

85.9 

91.6 

97.7 

98.6 

98.5 

98.8 

99.0 

99.3 

97.6 

98.7

99.0 

94.4 

99.9 

99.2 

60.0 

99.9 

98.4 

99.1 

83.0 

92.7 

91.9 

99.5 

98.3 

93.8

77.3 

99.8

77.7 

82.5

39.6 

51.9 

63.2 

76.4 

93.5 

60.9 

90.2 

66.9

100 

93.4 

90.6 

90.4

4.000

99.6 

74.1 

91.0 

99.8 

98.8 

96.0 

98.8 

99.1 

99.6 

97.9 

99.9 

99.6 

99.5 

98.4 

98.5 

98.8 

99.2 

99.2 

98.8 

99.8

94.0 

98.1 

99.7 

97.2 

94.8 

94.5 

99.9 

99.5 

98.2 

95.6 

91.5 

93.8 

99.2 

99.5 

99.5 

99.7 

99.4 

99.6 

98.6 

98.9

99.6 

94.5 

99.9 

99.6 

62.5 

100 

99.3 

99.5 

84.4 

97.7 

92.8 

100 

99.4 

97.5

81.8 

99.9 

84.4 

89.5

46.9 

52.2 

68.5 

83.9 

96.3 

70.9 

93.2 

67.5

95.5 

94.7 

93.2

8.000

100 

81.0 

93.3 

99.8 

99.7 

98.3 

99.4 

99.8 

99.8 

99.2 

100 

100 

99.9 

99.8 

99.9 

100 

99.8 

99.9 

99.4 

99.9

97.3 

98.6 

100 

98.5 

98.6 

97.2 

100 

99.9 

99.7 

97.6 

94.7 

95.6 

99.9 

99.9 

99.9 

100 

99.8 

99.9 

99.2 

99.1

99.8 

94.7 

100 

99.8 

68.7

100 

99.7 

87.4 

99.4 

93.3

99.9 

99.1

87.3 

100 

89.8 

93.6

55.8 

52.5 

71.2 

92.0 

98.3 

77.8 

94.5 

69.6

97.0 

97.3 

95.6

16.00

91.6 

95.7 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100 

100

99.5 

98.8

100 

100 

98.6

100 

100 

100 

97.5 

96.6 

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

95.2

ioo

84.3

100 

96.3 

100 

93.6

100 

100

96.9

94.7 

97.2

59.5 

55.2 

74.9 

100 

98.7 

82.9 

95.9 

74.4

98.7 

98.9 

97.6

32.00

100 

100

100 

100

100

100 

100

100

100

100

94.5

100

100 

100

100 

74.4 

100

ioo

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

98.5

Method 

of 

analysis

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S

1 100 percent < 64 mm.
.RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO 

TABLE 10. Particle-size analyses of bed material, Rio Grande near Bernalillo, N. Mex.

F31

Date

1952 

Apr. 25. - . ......

July 24. . _______ ... ....

1953 

Apr. 29 ______ .....

1956 

Apr. 2. ____ .... __ .. ...

Apr. 14 -, ......... .........

Apr. 16... __ _ ........

Apr. 21 ____________ .....

Apr. 23 ________ . _____ .

May 1 . ____ ....... _ ......

May 12, ___ . ____ .... _ .....

May 18. ___ .... ... ___ ......

May 22. .... ____ .. __ ....

May 26.. __ ... . __ ..........

Sept. 7 __ - __ . ___ ... .......

1967

May 13...... ........ _____

May 16. . __ ...... __ ......

May 27... _ . _______ . ......

1968 

May 8.. ... ..... ..... .... ..... .

May 27..... __ ... _ ...........

1960 

Feb. 15 _ ..................... .

May 24.... ____ ...............

1961 

Apr. 27 ... _ ................

May3... ......................

May 19... ....................

196S 

Apr. 20 «.. . 

Sampling 

points

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

15 

15 

3 

15 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

4 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

4 118 

29

3]2

6 

6 

6

6 

3 

5

Water 

temperature (op)

58 

62 

70 

72 

70 

75

57 

63 

65 

71 

62 

69

47 

51 

62 

65 

64 

61 

69 

66 

61 

75 

71 

71 

66 

75 

72 

78 

73 

80 

81 

79 

76

59 

58 

60 

64 

65 

73

58 

60 

67 

74 

67 

65 

63 

67 

73

44 

59 

65 

74

57 

66 

63

64 

71 

79

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

2.1 

.2 

.4 

.4 

.3 

1.0

.5

.7 

.6 

.7 

.5 

.3

1.6 

2.0 

.9 

.9 

1.1 

.9 

45 

1.2 

2.3 

.5 

.4 

2.2 

.6 

5.9 

1.8 

1.1 

8.6 

1.2 

5.1 

.6 

.9

1.2 

1.1 

.6 

.5

.7 

.6

.7 

.8 

.2 

.3 

.4 

.2 

.3 

.9 

.3

1.2 

.5 

.3 

.2

.4 

.4 

.2

1.6 

.2 

.1

0.125

10.8 

1.5 

3.0 

2.8 

2.8 

5.6

3.2 

5.4 

3.5 

40 

3.6 

2.8

9.1 

9.8 

5.3 

49 

6.3 

49 

17.3 

7.0 

17.1 

41 

47 

12.8 

2.9 

19.8 

8.6 

47 

30.5 

9.0 

24.2 

9.9 

5.0

7.3 

9.6 

4.9 

6.2 

5.2 

4.9

3.2 

6.1 

1.3 

2.4 

3.3 

2.2 

2.4 

7.3 

1.4

7.5 

3.7 

3.3 

43

9.8 

6.4 

4.1

7.1 

.8 

1.3

0.250

56.5 

15.2 

37.4 

26.7 

32.7 

45.5

28.3 

41.1 

25.7 

27.7 

34.1 

30.7

241 

44.4 

22.3 

31.5 

30.5 

32.4 

51.1 

43.3 

62.5 

21.2 

28.9 

79.0 

19.0 

58.2 

37.2 

24.9 

39.8 

43.5 

54.7 

39.1 

38.2

28.1 

41.6 

38.4 

46.4 

43.0 

48.9

34.2 

39.0 

12.8 

38.0 

33.4 

20.9 

22.4 

45.2 

16.1

34.1 

32.2 

35.6 

42.6

61.1 

58.8 

67.2

49.2 

23.6 

18.8

0.500

93.4 

70.6 

93.0 

86.4 

87.4 

86.9

86.5 

82.3 

86.7 

86.5 

74.3 

87.7

77.3 

88.1 

81.4 

90.1 

90.6 

99.1 

90.3 

91.0 

91.4 

87.1 

88.1 

96.7 

88.3 

92.4 

948 

92.1 

79.2 

95.6 

93.2 

87.7 

96.0

82.7 

93.4 

87.0 

93.1 

94.2 

98.4

77.9 

83.0 

78.9 

88.6 

97.3 

86.1 

78.0 

80.5 

83.1

77.8 

84.7 

89.4 

86.8

97.4 

96.6 

97.8

80.5 

77.3 

62.8

1.000

98.2 

93.7 

98.9 

95.3 

97.7 

98.2

98.0 

95.8 

98.5 

97.8 

91.0 

95.6

91.2 

97.1 

95.2 

96.9 

97.8 

99.9 

98.6 

97.4 

98.3 

96.7 

97.7 

99.2 

98.5 

98.9 

99.4 

98.2 

96.5 

99.2 

98.6 

97.9 

99.8

94.3 

99.7 

96.0 

99.6 

98.9 

100

91.4 

97.0 

98.5 

97.1 

99.9 

94.6 

93.9 

94.8 

98.1

92.2 

95.6 

96.9 

96.9

99.6 

99.8 

99.9

83.3 

96.1 

93.8

2.000

98.8 

97.8 

99.4 

97.3 

99.2 

99.5

99.1 

98.5 

99.3 

99.0 

944 

97.3

93.1 

98.6 

98.2 

98.8 

98.9 

100 

99.2 

99.2 

99.5 

98.0 

99.1 

99.6 

99.4 

99.6 

99.8 

99.0 

98.8 

99.7 

99.2 

99.5 

100

96.7 

99.9 

98.1 

100 

99.5

94.5 

98.4 

99.6 

98.8 

100 

96.7 

97.9 

98.1 

99.2

95.2 

97.4 

98.4 

98.8

100 

100 

100

83.8 

98.5 

97.9

4.000

99.2 

99.1 

99.5 

98.2 

99.6 

99.7

99.5 

99.4 

99.6 

99.4 

96.2 

98.2

99.0 

99.4 

99.3 

99.5 

99.5

99.5 

99.7 

99.9 

98.7 

99.6 

99.8 

99.9 

99.8 

99.9 

99.5 

99.5 

99.9 

99.7 

99.9

97.8 

100 

99.4

99.8

95.7 

98.8 

99.8 

99.6

97.7 

98.9 

99.1 

99.4

96.5 

98.2 

99.4 

99.4

840 

98.9 

99.3

8.000

99.2 

99.3 

99.6 

98.7 

100 

100

99.8 

99.8 

99.9 

100 

97.4 

98.8

99.6 

100 

99.8 

99.9 

99.8

100 

99.9 

99.9 

99.2 

99.9 

100 

100 

99.9 

100 

99.9 

99.9 

100 

100 

100

98.6

100

100

96.3 

99.2 

99.8 

99.7

98.6 

99.7 

99.6 

99.7

96.6 

99.0 

99.9 

99.8

84.3 

99.3 

99.9

16.00

100 

100 

100 

99.9

100 

100 

100

98.4 

99.7

100

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

99.5 

100

100

100 

100

100

96.6 

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100 

100

85.1 

100 

100

32.00

1 00

100 

100

100

100

93.8

Method 

of

analysis

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S

V 

V 

V

V 

V 

V

1 Average of samples from 5 sections in the reach.

2 Average of samples from 3 sections in the reach.

3 Average of samples from 4 sections in the reach. 

4 100 percent <64mm.
F32 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS 

TABLE 11. Particle-size analyses of bed material, Rio Grande at Albuquerque, N. Mex.

Date

1954 

Mar. 8.-. 

Mar. 11 _ 

Mar. 26 

Apr. 19 ... 

Apr. 22 ... ...

MayS. . . ..

Mayl7... 

May 21 _____ ... . _______

July 12.. .... ...... .

July 27.. . 

Aug. 10. 

Aug. 24..... 

Sept. 7 

Oct. 4..... .................

Oct. 18... ..... .....

Nov. 2.... 

Nov. 16. ___ .. __ . _ .. ___ .

Dec. 13 ___ . ____ ...........

1955 

Jan. 10 .. ...

Jan. 24.. .........................

Feb. 25........ . _ ...............

Mar. 7.. ... . .... ..... ... ...

Mar. 22........ ...................

Apr. 4............................

May 2 __________ .......

May 31 __ . ____ . ____ ....

June 13 ___ ___ ....... ___ .

July 11..... .................

July25. ...... ..........

Aug. 11.. . ................

Aug. 23.. 

Sept. 6 __ . __ .. ____ .....

Sept. 19 

Oct. 4...... ...................

Dec. I............................

Dec. 12 _______ . __ _ .

Dec. 27 ... 

1956 

Jan. 9. ____ . .. .........

Jan. 23. ..-....

Feb.7 .......

Feb. 20 ___ ._ 

July 20.. ... 

1967 

May 14..... ......................

IWsi-w 97

Sampling 

points

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

5 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

5 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3

Water 

temperature (°F)

44 

49 

47 

57 

61 

62 

58 

65 

63 

67 

67 

67 

67 

67 

61 

81 

82 

70 

75 

71 

78 

64 

57 

48 

42

37 

34 

35 

50 

47 

45 

58 

63 

60 

61 

72 

72 

76 

75 

73 

67 

68 

49 

42 

48

48 

43 

45 

50 

70

62 

65 

67 

75

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

0.1 

.1 

.2 

.7 

.3 

.3 

.2 

1.5 

.3 

.6 

.4 

1.4 

.3 

.1 

.2 

16.8 

1.2 

.2 

10.4 

9.4 

.1 

.2 

.3 

.7 

1.6

1.8 

.9 

.2 

.3 

.7 

.2 

.2 

.6 

.5 

1.3 

25.5 

1.9 

2.6 

3.1 

.6 

.2 

.0 

.6 

1.4 

1.3

1.1 

.5 

.5 

1.3 

3.3

2.8 

4.2 

.6 

.6

0.125

.8 

1.3 

2.2 

7.3 

3.4 

3.1 

2.4 

7.1 

2.9 

3.8 

2.4 

10.1 

2.2 

1.1 

2.5 

30.2 

6.3 

1.8 

15.0 

10.2 

1.7 

1.2 

1.5 

3.9 

5.4

9.2 

5.1 

2.1 

2.4 

5.6 

1.5 

1.1 

3.0 

3.4 

2.9 

32.7 

4.9 

8.9 

12.0 

2.5 

.7 

1.1 

2.3 

4.6 

5.1

4.2 

2.4 

2.1 

4.4 

9.7

11.7 

24.4 

4.2 

4.6

0.250

14.4 

16.8 

37.5 

56.0 

43.5 

31.4 

33.8 

57.2 

34.2 

29.9 

28.6 

50.5 

28.5 

20.8 

46.2 

41.4 

43.1 

19.8 

52.6 

22.0 

29.2 

14.3 

21.4 

31.1 

21.6

56.0 

37.9 

27.0 

25.8 

46.1 

16.8 

16.9 

38.5 

23.9 

39.6 

57.9 

28.6 

38.8 

49.9 

14.4 

5.4 

14.5 

18.0 

31.0 

35.8

29.8 

22.7 

15.2 

19.1 

42.7

40.1 

73.1 

28.0 

29.9

0.500

85.6 

74.0 

88.5 

84.8 

89.1 

87.6 

96.2 

96.8 

82.8 

84.7 

80.2 

85.2 

78.1 

80.4 

93.1 

73.8 

83.9 

77.0 

95.9 

88.1 

93.2 

75.9 

85.3 

91.4 

78.0

87.1 

93.0 

88.2 

95.2 

92.7 

91.2 

96.6 

92.6 

80.0 

88.6 

95.4 

91.8 

89.2 

96.0 

64.9 

61.4 

90.7 

91.9 

77.2 

81.1

93.5 

96.7 

72.7 

82.4 

92.5

85.0 

95.6 

74.7 

93.5

1.000

98.1 

93.3 

96.9 

92.6 

97.9 

97.6 

99.3 

99.5 

95.2 

91.0 

95.0 

96.3 

93.1 

93.2 

98.2 

88.4 

92.8 

97.6 

99.4 

95.8 

98.8 

95.7 

97.3 

97.8 

96.6

96.2 

98.2 

96.6 

99.2 

97.8 

99.1 

99.4 

98.4 

95.6 

97.4 

98.2 

98.6 

96.6 

98.7 

90.3 

94.8 

98.6 

98.7 

92.6 

97.7

99.7 

99.7 

93.6 

97.4 

97.9

95.8 

99.3 

87.9 

99.1

2.000

99.3 

96.9 

98.5 

95.7 

99.4 

98.9 

99.6 

99.9 

97.4 

92.1 

97.6 

98.7 

96.5 

96.5 

99.5 

94.9 

94.6 

99.2 

99.9 

97.2 

99.5 

98.3 

99.0 

98.5 

99.0

98.8 

98.9 

98.1 

99.8 

98.8 

99.6 

99.6 

99.5 

98.7 

99.4 

99.5 

99.3 

98.6 

99.4 

95.6 

96.4 

99.5 

99.1 

97.0 

99.0

99.9 

99.9 

96.5 

99.1 

99.3

97.1 

99.9 

92.2 

99.8

4.000

99.7 

98.3 

99.0 

97.7 

99.9 

99.5 

99.7 

100 

98.4 

92.7 

98.5 

99.4 

98.0 

98.0 

99.9 

98.3 

96.2 

99.7 

100 

98.1 

99.7 

99.2 

99.6 

99.0 

99.8

99.7 

99.3 

99.2 

100 

99.5 

99.9 

99.8 

99.8 

99.5 

99.8 

99.9 

99.6 

99.5 

99.8 

97.6 

99.3 

99.8 

99.3 

99.0 

99.4

99.9 

100 

97.4 

99.6 

99.9

98.0 

100 

95.4 

100

8.000

100 

99.4 

99.8 

99.2 

100 

99.8 

100

99.2 

93.9 

99.4 

99.9 

99.0 

99.6 

100 

99.3 

98.4 

99.9

98.7 

99.9 

99.8 

100 

99.3 

100

100 

99.9 

100

100 

100 

100 

100 

99.8 

100 

100 

99.9 

99.9 

100 

99.0 

99.8 

99.9 

99.6 

99.8 

99.6

100

98.3 

99.9 

100

98.8

98.0

16.00

100 

100 

100

100

100 

96.6 

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

100 

100

99.9 

100 

100

100

100

100

100 

100

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100

100 

100

99.4

100

32.00

100

100

100

Method 

of 

analysis

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S
iRIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F33

TABLE 12. Particle-size analyses of bed material, Rio Grande near Belen, N. Mex. 

[Methods of analysis: S, sieve; V, visual accumulation tube]

Date

1954 

Mar. 22____.._._ .-. 

May 5.. ._. 

July 12.. ____ . ___ . _ . _

Aug. 10. ___________ . __

Sept. 21...-. _____ .. _ . ......

Oct. 19..- ___ ____ - _ 

Nov. 16..............-. .... .

1955

Jan. 26-. _____ . __ . ____

Feb. 9 ....

Feb. 24 _ ........................

Mar. 9. ___ ... __ . ___ 

Mar. 25.... _______. . .....

May 20 ______________

A Tier Q

Aug. 23...-...... ..............

1967 

May 15 ___________ ... .....

May 27 ...........................

Sampling 

points

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3

3 

3 

3

Water 

temperature

(°f)

55 

64 

77 

71 

68 

75 

78 

79 

74 

63 

53

38 

40 

41 

45 

57 

60 

73 

76 

79

61 

64 

75

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.062

1.0 

.2 

.1 

.3 

3.0 

.1 

.8 

.6 

.4 

1.1 

.3

2.0 

.1 

25.1 

.1 

.2 

.3 

5.0 

.2 

.8

1.0 

1.3 

1.1

0.125

4.3 

2.0 

1.3 

2.5 

21.7 

1.8 

6.9 

5.8 a9

6.3 

2.8

9.6 

1.3 

36.8 

1.9 

3.4 

3.1 

15.0 

1.1 

4.0

4.2 

5.2 

8.3

0.250

22.9 

35.1 

32.4 

31.7 

97.3 

38.6 

68.2 

47.9 

35.8 

37.4 

31.2

47.9 

20.5 

69.8 

21.0 

41.6 

30.9 

49.8 

32.4 

28.9

40.7 

48.1 

61.4

0.500

87.2 

87.7 

96.9 

88.4 

99.8 

89.7 

96.6 

91.5 

88.0 

89.2 

88.9

96.9 

90.2 

97.7 

94.0 

93.0 

88.7 

91.0 

92.2 

98.2

89.7 

93.1 

97.4

1.000

97.4 

99.4 

98.9 

98.9 

100 

98.7 

99.3 

98.6 

98.1 

98.6 

97.1

99.4 

98.1 

99.7 

98.2 

99.1 

98.7 

98.9 

98.2 

99.8

96.7 

99.6 

99.6

2.000

99.1 

99.9 

99.9 

99.8

99.9 

99.7 

99.7 

99.1 

99.6 

98.8

99.8 

99.4 

100 

99.0 

99.8 

99.7 

99.7 

99.3 

99.9

98.1 

99.9 

100

4.000

99.4 

99.9 

100 

99.8

100 

100 

100 

99.2 

99.9 

99.5

100 

99.8

99.5 

100 

99.9 

99.8 

99.8 

100

98.9 

100

8.000

99.8 

100

100

99.2 

100 

100

100

99.8

100 

99.9 

100

99.7

16.00

100

99.4

100

100

100

32.00

100

Metbod 

of 

analysis

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S 

S

S 

S 

S

TABLE 13. Sources of published particle-size analyses of suspended sediment used in the modified Einstein calculations

Sediment station

Rio Grande at 

Otowi Bridge near San Ildefonso. 

N. Mex. _. ............

Cochiti, N. Mex. 

Rio Grande at _______________

San Felipe, N. Mex.

Bernalillo, N. Mex.

Albuquerque, N. Mex.

Belen, N. Mex.

Water year

1958

1954, 1955

1956 

1957 

1958 

1954. 1955

1956 

1957 

1958 

1952

1956 

1957 

1958 

1954, 1955

1956 

1957 

1954. 1955

1957

Source: T7SGS Water 

Supply Paper1573.

1402, p. 515-517.

1452, p. 459-460. 

1522, p. 486. 

1573. 

1402, p. 517-518.

1452, p. 460-461. 

1522, p. 487. 

1573. 

1498-H (Nordin, 1964).

1452, p. 365-366. 

1522, p. 410. 

1573. 

1402, p. 523-525.

1452, p. 461-462. 

1522, p. 488. 

1402, p. 530-531.

1522, p. 489.
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

TABLE 14. Previously unpublished particle-size analyses of suspended sediment used in the modified Einstein calculations 

[Method of analysis: P, pipette; 8, sieve; W, in distilled water; C, chemically dispersed; V, visual accumulation tube]

Date Time

Water

discharge

(cfs)

Water 

temperature (°F)

Suspended sediment

Concentration of 

sample 

(ppm)

Concentration of 

suspension 

analyzed 

(ppm)

Percent finer than indicated size, in millimeters

0.002 0.004 0.016 0.062 0.125 0.260 0.500 1.000 2.000

Method of 

analysis

Rio Grande at Otowi Bridge, near San Ddefonso, N. Mex.

1959

Aug. 8 ____ _ _

1961 

Apr. 25_ ____

May 2 _ ___ .

May 17...........

June 21__________

July 20-... .._...

1962 

Apr. 19-........_.

May 31__. .._____.

July 2__. _________

1300

1310

1415

1145

1440

1245

1350

1350

1345

1,270

2,780

4,000

2,750

908

1,090

6,040

1,460

684

73

52

57

56

76

74

59

59

78

24, 000

1,350

2,480

1,120

284

3

CQO

4,240

1,660

203

3,980

1,980

S

oon

3,616

4,510

13

14

21

10

54

16

16

07

13

77

24

28

K1

19

91

39

52

26

48

fifi

41

7

?,?,

97

567°.

36

52

67

70

11

25

99

80

90

67

65

70

91

44

51

100

95

96

92

96

75.

98

94

97

100

100

100

99

100

100

100

100

100

VPWC

VPWC

VPWC

V

s

VPWC

VPWC

V

V

Rio Grande at Cochiti, N. Mex.

1961 

Apr. 26_. ...... _.

May 2___ .........

May 18......__._.

June 22....... ...

1050

1155

1150

1110

2,090

3,680

2,620

674

52

57

CQ

76

1,210

2 7°.ft

2 7 en

153

S

con

1 Q9ft

16 10

4

01

6

41

Kfi

11

80

53

68

16

85

89

91

36

96

100

99

73

100

100

96 100

V

VPWC

VPWC

s

Rio Grande at San Felipe, N. Mex.

1961 

Apr. 26____.___ __

May 2________ __

May 18..... ..___.

June 22..... ______

1350

1535

1110

1140

2,220

3,580

2,510

680

57

62

62

76

1,360

2 can

1,040

519

2 310,

2 71ft

13

1 K.

16

17

OK

OQ

41

4Q

34

28

53

CQ

51

34

87

82

90

58

100

no

100

91

100

100

WPVC

VPWC

V

V

Rio Grande near Bernalillo, N. Mex.

1968 

Apr. 29......._...

May 5__. ________

June !___ -_ ___

June 2_ _ _______

June 4______ __ _

June 17 ___ __ _

1962 

Apr. 20 ..._..____

June !-__....._ __

June 25_._... __ _

1315

1430

1245

1,540

551

2,570

2, 150

2,090

1,340

5,340

987

453

57

63

65

71

62

69

fU

71

79

2,450

554

2,530

2,010

1,600

1,060

4,360

1,720

453

3,510 12 16 94

70

48

67

64

58

42

13

60

83

73

87

84

80

64

77

20

76

96

98

100

97

99

93

97

44

98

100

100

100

100

100

100

80

100

100

V

V

V

V

V

V

VPWC

V

V

TABLE 15. Equations relating transport rates to simple hydraulic variables, with standard error of estimate in log units and percentages

Station

Otowi..........

Cochiti-.. .-

San Felipo ... 

Bernalillo--.--

Albuquerque ... 

Helen...........

Pvs Pr

Equation

Pr=0.169pi-« 

Pr=0.00361pi-»8 

Pr=0.0764pi-w 

Pr=0.137Pi-« 

Pr=0.00435p2-oo 

Pr=0.00224p2-<>3

S,

Log 

units

0.228 

.433 

.340 

.258 

.376 

.412

Percent

+

69

171 

118 

81 

138 

158

41 

63 

54 

45 

58 

61

g vsgr

Equation

9r=1.257?i-« 

9r=0.321g2-« 

5r=1.186g'-« 

ffr=1.232ffi-« 

?r=0.391?2-5' 

ffr=0.165ff*-»i

S.

Log 

units

0.242 

.498 

.320 

.175 

.374 

.421

Percent

+

75 

215 

109 

50 

136 

164

-

43 

68 

52 

33 

58 

62

VVSQT

Equation

gr=0.605F3-*8 

8T=0.105F*-8» 

9r=0.359Vr3-«9 

ffr=0.877F3-°8 

gr=0.219F<.5« 

gr=0.104F«-is

Se

Log 

units

0.255 

.370 

.276 

.286 

.313 

.375

Percent

+

80 

134 

89 

93 

106 

137

-

44

57 

47 

48 

51 

58

Fvscy

Equation

Ci 318V1-" 

Cr=80.4F2.»i 

Cr=250Fi-« 

Cr=446Vi-i« 

CV=58.8F3-«8 

Cr=41.3F3-M

S.

Log 

units

a 236 

.514 

.346 

.260 

.554 

.355

Percent

+

72 

226 

122 

82 

258 

126

42 

69 

55 

45 

72 

56
RIO GRANDE, NEW MEXICO F35

REFERENCES CITED

Bagnold, R. A., 1956, The flow of cohesionless grains in fluids: 

Royal Soc. (London) Philos. Trans., ser. A, v. 249, p. 

235-297.

Bogardi, J. L., 1961, Some aspects of the application of the theory 

of sediment transportation to engineering problems: Jour. 

Geophys. Research, v. 66, No. 10, p. 3337-3346.

Colby, B. R., 1956, Relationship of sediment discharge to streamflow: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file rept., 170 p.

 1957, Relationship of unmeasured sediment discharge 

to mean velocity: Am. Geophys. Union Trans., v. 38, No. 

5, p. 708-717.

 1961, Studies of flow in alluvial channels; effect of depth 

of flow on discharge of bed material: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 1498-D, 12 p.

1964, Sediment transport in alluvial channels: sand

discharge and mean velocity relationships in sand-bed

streams: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 462-A, 47 p. 

Colby, B. R., and Hembree, C. H., 1955, Computations of total

sediment discharge, Niobrara River near Cody, Nebraska:

U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1357, 187 p. 

Colby, B. R., and Hubbell, D. W., 1961, Simplified methods for

computing total sediment discharge with the modified

Einstein procedure: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply

Paper 1593, 17 p., 8 pi. 

Culbertson, J. K., and Dawdy, D. R., 1964, A study of fluvial

characteristics and hydraulic variables, middle Rio Grande

New Mexico: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper

1498-F, 74 p. 

Dawdy, D. R., 1961, Depth-discharge relations in alluvial

streams-discontinuous rating curves: U.S. Geol. Survey

Water-Supply Paper 1498-C, 16 p. 

Einstein, H. A., 1942, Formulas for the transportation of bed

load: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers Trans., v. 107, p. 561-597. 

 1950, The bed-load function for sediment transportation

in open channel flows: U.S. Dept. Agriculture Tech. Bull.

1026, 71 p. 

Einstein, H. A., and Chien, Ning, 1953, Transport of sediment

mixtures with large ranges of grain sizes: Univ. California

Inst. of Eng. Research [Berkeley, Calif.], U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers, Missouri River Division Sediment Ser. 2,

42 p.

Kennedy, J. F., 1961, Further laboratory studies of roughness 

and suspended load of alluvial streams: California Inst. of 

Technology [Pasadena, Calif.], W. M. Keck Laboratory of 

Hydraulics and Water Resources Rept. KH-R-3, 36 p.

Laursen, E. M., 1958, The total sediment load of streams: Am. 

Soc. Civil Engineers Proc., v. 84, No. HY 1, paper 1530, 

p. 1-35.

Leopold, L. B., and Mad dock, T., Jr., 1953, The hydraulic geometry of stream channels and some physiographic implications: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 252, 57 p.

Leopold, L. B., and Wolman, M. G., 1956, Floods in relation to 

the river channel: Internat. Assoc. of Hydrology [Dijon, 

France] Pub. 42, p. 85-98.

Meyer-Peter, E., and Muller, R., 1948, Formulas for bed-load 

transport: Internat. Assoc. for Hydraulic Structures Research, 2d mtg., Stockholm, 1948, p. 39-64.

Miller, C. R., 1951, Analysis of flow duration, sediment-rating 

curve method of computing sediment yield: U.S. Bur. 

Reclamation [Denver, Colo.], 15 p.

Nordin, C. F., Jr., 1963, A preliminary study of sediment transport parameters, Rio Puerco near Bernardo, New Mexico: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 462-C, 21 p.

 , 1964, Aspects of flow resistance and sediment transport, 

Rio Grande near Bernalillo, New Mexico: U.S. Geol Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 1498-H, 41 p.

Nordin, C. F., Jr., and Beverage, J. P., 1964, Temporary storage 

of fine sediment in islands and point bars: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Prof. Paper 475-D, Art. 150, p. D138-D140.

Nordin, C. F., Jr., and Culbertson, J. K., 1961, Particle-size 

distribution of stream-bed material in the middle Rio Grande 

basin, New Mexico: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 424-C, 

Art. 265, p. C323-C326.

Nordin, C. F., Jr., and Dempster, G. R., 1963, Vertical distribution of velocity and suspended-sediment concentration, 

Middle Rio Grande, New Mexico: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. 

Paper 462-B, 20 p.

Straub, L. G., Anderson, A. G., and Flammer, G. H., 1958, 

Experiments on the influence of temperature on sediment 

load: Univ. California Inst. of Eng. Research [Berkeley, 

Calif.], Missouri River Division Sediment Series No. 10, 36 p.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1965 O 753-190