Lab #1

docx

School

University of Toronto, Scarborough *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

EESB02

Subject

Geography

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

7

Uploaded by sindhuhu

Report
Principles of Geomorphology – Lab #1 Basin Morphometry – Highland Creek Catchment Part 1 1.1) The stream orders, number of streams in each order and average stream lengths of each are displayed in the table below: Stream Order # of Streams Avg. Stream Lengths (obtained from topographic maps) 1 21 102.6/21 = 4.88/2.5 = 1.954 km = 1954.29 m 2 6 54.8/6 = 9.13/2.5 = 3.653 km = 3653.33 m 3 2 22/2 = 11/2.5 = 4.400 km = 4400 m 4 1 15.6/1 = 15.6/2.5 = 6.240 km = 6240 m 1.2) (A) The graph of stream order vs. number of streams obtained from the printed maps of the Highland Creek catchment is displayed below: 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 1 10 100 f(x) = 51.44 exp( − 1.02 x ) R² = 0.98 Stream Order vs. Number of Streams 2020 Stream Order Number of Streams ( B) The graph of stream order vs. the average stream length (in metres) obtained from the printed maps of the Highland Creek catchment is displayed below:
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 100 1000 10000 f(x) = 1495.34 exp( 0.37 x ) R² = 0.95 Stream Order vs. Average Stream Length 2020 Stream Order Avg. Stream Length (m) 1.3) The relationship between the stream order vs. the number of streams seems to have a strong negative relationship as observed visually as well as through the correlation coefficient (R 2 = 0.9847). Whereas, the relationship between the stream order vs. average stream length is observed to have a strong positive correlation (R 2 = 0.95). 2.1) The bifurcation ratio (ratio of the number of streams in one order to that in the next higher order): B R1 = N 0 / N 0 + 1 B R1 = 21 / 6 B R1 = 3.5 B R2 = N 0 / N 0 + 1 B R2 = 6/2 B R2 = 3 B R3 = N 0 / N 0 + 1 B R3 = 2/1 B R3 = 2 2.2) Drainage Density (ratio of the total length of streams over the total drainage area of the basin) is as following. The total drainage area of the basin calculated in lab 1 was 118.5 km 2 . D = ∑L / A D = (stream order 1 + stream order 2 + stream order 3 + stream order 4) / total area D = (41.04 km + 21.92 km + 8.80 km + 6.24 km) / 118.5 km 2 D = 78km / 118.5 km 2
D = 0.66/km 2.3) Length Ratio (ratio of the average length of streams of a given order to the average length of the next lower order): L R1 = Average length stream order 2 /Average length stream order 1 = 3.653 km / 1.954 km = 1.87 L R2 = Average length stream order 3 /Average length stream order 2 = 4.4 km / 3.65 km = 1.20 L R3 = Average length stream order 4 /Average length stream order 3 = 6.24 km / 4.4 km = 1.42 2.4) Relief Ratio (ratio between basin total relief and basin length): Max elevation (from GIS): 206.434 Min elevation (from GIS): 71.502 Length of the entire Highland Creek: 38 inches (measured from the printed maps using a ruler) Conversion: 38 inches * 1 cm 0.393701 inches * 20000 cm 1 cm * 1 m 100 cm = 19303.99 m R H = H/L 0 (H= Max-min elevations) R H = (206.4 – 71.5)/ 19303.99 R H = 0.007 2.5) Basin form Length obtained: 19303.99 m = 19.30 km Width: 21 inches * 1 cm 0.393701 inches * 20000 cm 1 cm * 1 m 100 cm = 10667.99 m = 10.67 km B f = A/L basin 2 (Basin length = (Length + Width)/2) B f = 118.5 km 2 / {(19.30km + 10.67km)/ 2} B f = 118.5 km 2 / 14.985 km B f = 7.91/km
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
2.6) Stream Frequency (measured through dividing the total # of streams of all orders by the area of the basin) F s = ∑ N streams / A F s = (21 + 6 + 2 + 1)/ total area F s = 30/118.5 km 2 F s = 0.25/km 2 3) The graph of stream order vs. stream number of 2020 values for the Highland Creek, superimposed with the 1954 and 1971 values is displayed below: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 100 1000 10000 Stream Order vs. Stream numbers (1954 & 1971 & 2020) 1954 1971 2020 Stream Order Stream number The graph of stream order vs. average stream lengths of 2020 values for the Highland Creek, superimposed with the 1954 and 1971 values is displayed below:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Stream Order vs. Average Stream Lengths (1954 vs. 1971 vs. 2020) 1954 1971 2020 Stream Order Avg. Stream Lengths (m) (A) There are plenty of observable and significant differences in both of the graphs when the years 1954, 1971, and 2020 data are compared. The first graph of stream order vs. the number of streams shows clearly that as the years have passed by since 1954, the number of streams in each order have undoubtedly decreased. The number of streams in order 1 declined from 6205 down to 21 in just about 66 years. Even within 17 years, from 1954 to 1971, the number of streams drastically dwindled with only 2406 remaining, down from 6205. Similarly, the average lengths of the streams also had perceptible differences when compared. The average stream lengths of all orders increased substantially in 2020 compared to the lengths in 1954 and 1971. The highest increase was amongst the lengths of order 1. (B) Although 66 years might appear like a long period of time with lots of room for change, it is regardless an abrupt decline in the number of streams. There are a number of factors that could’ve affected the number of streams over time. The first and biggest factor being land adaptation by humans because of the increase in population for obvious reasons and other factors could be things like climate change, shifts in precipitation patterns, etc. The upsurge in the average stream lengths is sort of a by-product from the decline in the number of streams. The average lengths of each order (especially order 1) was very small in 1954 as well as 1971 because of the huge number of streams at the time. As the number of streams decreased, the length of the streams stayed fairly the same/long overtime therefore causing the average length to increase. Part 2 – GIS component For this part of the assignment, all the values used were obtained from the GIS software. Stream Order # of Streams Avg. Stream Lengths
1 21 1498.27 m = 1.50 km 2 6 3787.09 m = 3.79 km 3 2 4981.00 m = 4.98 km 4 1 7027.90 m = 7.03 km A. Length ratio: L R1 = Average length stream order 2/Average length stream order 1 = 3787.09 / 1498.27 L R1 = 2.53 L R2 = Average length stream order 3/Average length stream order 2 = 4981.01 / 3787.09 L R2 = 1.32 L R3 = Average length stream order 4/Average length stream order 3 = 7027.90 / 4981.01 L R3 = 1.41 B. Relief ratio R H = H/L 0 (H= Max-min elevations) R H = (206.4 – 71.5)/16258.0608 R H = 0.008 C. Drainage density D = ∑L / A D = (stream order 1 + stream order 2 + stream order 3 + stream order 4) / D = (31463.74 + 22722.56 + 9962.017 + 7027.901) / 114422628.6869 D = 71.18 km / 114.42 km 2 D = 0.62/km D. If we were to compare and contrast the GIS data with the non-GIS method used to extract information about the catchment of Highland Creek, we would notice that the non-GIS method was not accurate but incredibly close to being accurate. This is obviously because when collecting the data using the printed maps with instruments, there is always error
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
involved (either human error or instrumental error). 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 100 1000 10000 1498.27 3787.09 4981 7027.9 1954.29 3653.33 4400 6240 Stream order vs. Average lengths GIS & non-GIS method GIS method non-GIS method Stream order Average lengths (m) Looking at this graph of GIS average lengths of streams vs. the non-GIS average lengths of streams on a semi-logarithmic scale, its easier to visualize that the numbers from non- GIS method were very close to the GIS method. You can also tell the difference from the values of length ratio, relief ratio and drainage density, that were calculated for both, that non-GIS method was slightly inaccurate. References United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019). World Population Prospects 2019, custom data acquired via website. https://population.un.org/wpp/DataQuery/ Toronto, Canada Population 1950-2020. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/20402/toronto/population The Impacts of Climate Change on Rivers. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.americanrivers.org/threats-solutions/clean-water/impacts-rivers/#