HOW DOES THE HYDRAULIC RADIUS, CHANNEL SHAPE AND

DISCHARGE INFLUENCE STREAM EFFICIENCY OF THE UPPER AND

Name of Candidate: Mikehla Simms

Statement of Purpose of

Investigation……………………………………………………………………………………1

Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………2

Presentation and Analysis………………………………………………………………………9

Discussion of Findings…………………………………………………………………………18

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..21

Recommendations……………………………………………………………………………..22

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………..23

Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………24
 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION

This study is to investigate the effects of changes in hydraulic radius, channel shape, and

discharge on the stream efficiency of the upper and middle courses of the southeast Jamaican

Morant River. Rivers are dynamic systems that move silt and water, greatly influencing the

terrain. A river's flow velocity and channel features have a direct impact on how well it

transports silt. Higher-velocity rivers may carry bigger silt particles, whereas slower-moving

rivers can only carry finer materials.

​ The river's velocity will be determined using Manning's Equation to evaluate these

dynamics, and Bradshaw's Model will offer a theoretical framework for comprehending how

important variables like discharge and hydraulic radius are anticipated to vary downstream.

Stream efficiency will be assessed using the hydraulic radius formula (R = A/P), where A is the

cross-sectional area and P is the wetted perimeter. To reduce discharge fluctuation, data will be

collected during the dry season. Higher hydraulic radius channels, which are usually deeper and

broader, are expected to be more efficient. This study will advance our knowledge of how

sediment movement and overall stream performance are impacted by the physical features of

rivers.

Objectives:

●​ To calculate and contrast the Morant River's middle and upper courses' hydraulic radii in

order to determine whether a segment exhibits better stream efficiency.

●​ To note and characterize the channel measurement at both locations and investigate the

ways in which this affects flow properties.

1
 ●​ To recognize and characterize the fluvial features found in the Morant River's middle and

upper stages.

●​ To assess how flow changes, channel shape, and hydraulic radius affect stream efficiency

in both river courses.

2
 METHODOLOGY

This study's approach included quantitative and qualitative data-collecting techniques. Hydraulic

radius calculations, channel shape evaluations, and discharge measurements were used to collect

quantitative data, which entails numerical measurements and statistical analysis. The efficiency

and features of the stream were examined using qualitative data, which is centered on descriptive

observations and non-numerical findings. Using a mixed-methods approach to data collecting

enabled a thorough comprehension of the research issue. Field measurements were taken at

certain locations along the Morant River for primary data collection. These locations were

chosen based on accessibility and differences in stream characteristics. For hydraulic radius

measurement, the width, depth, and wetted perimeter were recorded, and calculations were

𝐴
conducted using the formula R = 𝑃
.

Channel shape analysis was performed by sketching cross-sections and measuring

bankfull width and depth, while discharge was calculated using the equation Q = A x V, where

velocity was determined through a flow meter or float test. The data was gathered using a variety

of instruments. Two individuals stood on each bank of the river, each holding a side of the rope,

and a tape measure and rope were used to measure the river's width. To acquire the most exact

findings, others were in the river directly across from them, straightening and stabilizing the rope

and tape measure. This can be seen in image 1. There were difficulties because of the higher

velocity when this was done in the upper course. In Image 2, this is seen.

3
Image 1: Picture showing how the channel width was measured at Seaforth

Image 2: Picture showing how the channel width was measured at the Upper Course in the Morant River

4
The measurement of the river's velocity was another technique that was employed. Bottles, cans,

and other items were submerged in the water at a designated location, which was made as

straight as possible between banks. They were submerged in water and timed with a stopwatch to

find out how long it would take the object to go to a different location. To increase the accuracy

and dependability of the data, this was done again. Image 3 is an example of this.

Image 3: Picture showing object used for river velocity measurement

To demonstrate the Hydraulic Radus utilizing the RAP test, the wetted perimeter was measured

in addition to the other measures.

As previously stated, observations were crucial to our study. Every aspect of the three sites was

closely examined, including the rock kinds, deposition types, and landforms. Along the river's

bank, rocks of all sizes were deposited, with boulders being deposited in the upper course and the

deposition becoming smaller downstream.

5
A waterfall, braided channels, interlocking spurs, and rapids were among the prominent fluvial

characteristics seen in the upper Morant River. Steep slopes and high-energy settings are

characterized by these landforms. Features including rapids, V-shaped valleys, and emerging

meanders were seen in the middle course; meanders continued into the lower course and were

more noticeable as one moved downstream. The river's meandering pattern indicates a slow

decline in gradient and an increase in lateral erosion over time.

​ Numerous rock types were found, especially in the upper stream where metamorphic

rocks were dominant. But there were also igneous rocks, demonstrating the river basin's

geological variety. Using a straightforward random sample technique, sediment deposition was

evaluated. Since it would be impossible to measure every rock in the channel, an impartial

representative sample of rocks with a range of sizes, shapes, and colors was chosen. Since no

particular size or kind of rock was purposefully picked, this method guaranteed selection

fairness. A fair summary of the river's depositional features was given by the variety of materials

sampled. Images 4 and 5 show supporting photographic evidence.

Image 4: Picture showing how the smaller deposition was measured

6
Image 5: Picture showing how the larger deposition was measured

In order to assist the field inquiry, secondary sources were crucial. One of the main sources of

information was the geography textbook published by the Caribbean Examinations Council. It

offered both theoretical support and helpful direction when gathering data in the field. In

particular, the literature was utilized to match the words and properties of geomorphology with

the landforms that were seen. Additionally, it was reviewed for definitions and explanations of

essential words such as hydraulic action, wetted perimeter, and necessary computations relating

to hydraulic radius and stream efficiency. To put findings in perspective and support analysis,

case studies from the textbook and reliable internet sources were also included.

​ The river's velocity was one significant restriction that the research ran across. The

current was very strong in several places, making it difficult for researchers to stand in the water

and take measurements. The convenience and accuracy of measurements were impacted, and

7
data collection was greatly delayed since the tape measure used to measure the wetted perimeter

and channel width frequently became entangled in the flow.

Map 1: Morant Bay, 1:50 000, Sheet 19, National Land Agency, Government of Jamaica, 2010.

8
 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Figure 1: Cross Section of the Morant River's Middle/Seaforth Course

The middle course of the Morant River's channel width and depth is seen in Figure 1. The depth

fluctuation seen in the diagram is probably caused by lateral and vertical erosion processes that

occur in rivers. This portion of the river has a significantly wider channel than the upper course,

which results in a wider wetted perimeter. According to Bradshaw's Model, this deeper and

broader channel raises the hydraulic radius, improving the total stream efficiency.

9
Figure 2: Cross Section of the Morant River's Upper Course and Hillside

The Morant River's upper flow, seen in Figure 3, has a substantially narrower channel width than

the middle course. This reduced breadth illustrates the impact of vertical erosion, which

predominates in the upper course, and implies a decreased discharge capacity. Stream efficiency

is reduced by the smaller hydraulic radius caused by the smaller cross-sectional area, even if the

channel depth is comparatively comparable to the middle course. A more turbulent flow is

further facilitated by the channel's confinement and the steep valley walls, which intensify

erosion processes including hydraulic action and abrasion.

10
 Characteristics SEAFORTH HILLSIDE

Calculations Measurements Calculations Measurements

Channel Width - 23m - 16.7m

Channel Depth 520/13 40cm 666/13 37cm

(Mean)

Cross-sectional 0.4m x 23m 9.2m2 16.7m x 4.6m 617.9m2

Area

Wetted Perimeter 6 (chains) 28.7m 3 (chains) x 13.8m

x4.6m + 1.1 4.6m

River Discharge (1.31+ 1.34 + 1.37ms-1 (1.56+ 1.57+ 1.31ms-1

1.31 + 1.50)/4 1.12 + 0.97)/4

Hydraulic Radius 28.7/9.2 3.12m3 13.8/6.179 2.23m3

Figure 3: Table Outlining Seaforth and Hillside's Fluvial Features

Key fluvial features measured and calculated at two locations along the Morant River—Hillside

(upper course) and Seaforth (middle course)—are shown in Figure 3.

11
The hydraulic radius, which is determined using the formula R = A/P, where A is the

cross-sectional area and P is the wetted perimeter, is a crucial measure of stream efficiency,

according to Leopold, Wolman, and Miller (1964). Greater efficiency is indicated by a larger

hydraulic radius since it allows for the transportation of more water along the riverbed and banks

with less contact and resistance. The hydraulic radius was determined to be 3.12 m at Seaforth

and 2.23 m at Hillside. This disparity suggests that the stream efficiency of the middle Morant

River route is higher than that of the upper course. The river's capacity to carry its load and

discharge is improved by the wider, more open channel with less frictional resistance suggested

by the bigger hydraulic radius at Seaforth. The channel depth and breadth data displayed in

Figures 1 and 2 reinforce this pattern and illustrate how channel geometry has a major impact on

hydraulic properties.

There are parallels and differences between Seaforth (middle course) and Hillside (upper course)

when it comes to the Morant River's bedload characteristics. Bedload is defined as sediment

particles that are carried along the riverbed by rolling, sliding, or bouncing; these particles can be

angular, sub-angular, sub-rounded, or rounded. Seaforth has a more varied bedload form, with

more rounded and sub-rounded particles, as seen in Figures 4 and 5. Longer transportation

lengths and continuous erosional processes like abrasion, which gradually smooth and change

the morphology of silt, are the causes of this difference. On the other hand, the majority of the

material in the bedload at Hillside is angular and sub-angular. Given that the material is more

recently eroded and has not yet been significantly altered by fluvial processes, this suggests that

the sediment has seen less transportation and erosion at this location.

12
Figure 4: A pie chart illustrating the many bedload kinds available at Seaforth

Figure 4 illustrates the distribution of bedload types at Seaforth, located in the middle course of

the Morant River. The data reveals significant bedload diversity, with four distinct categories

represented among the ten samples collected. Sub-angular particles were the most common,

accounting for 50% of the samples. Additionally, there were two rounded, two angular, and

one sub-rounded particle. This variation highlights the effects of prolonged transport and

erosion processes characteristic of the river's middle course.

13
Figure 5: Pie Chart Displaying Hillside and Bedload

The bedload roundness at Hillside, which is situated in the upper channel of the Morant River, is

shown in Figure 5. With 75% of the samples categorized as sub-angular and 25% as angular, the

pie chart displays a narrow range of bedload types. Because the materials in the upper channel

are usually more recently weathered and have had less abrasion, resulting in sharper and more

angular debris, the reduced variety compared to Seaforth is a reflection of little transit and

erosion.

Two primary bedload types were found at Hillside, which is situated in the upper channel of the

Morant River: angular and sub-angular. As is typical of the upper channel, where materials have

not yet seen significant weathering or abrasion, the bulk of the sediments were sub-angular,

suggesting little transit and recent erosion. On the other hand, as seen in Image 6, the middle

course at Seaforth has a generally more straight channel. However, because to continuous

erosion and deposition processes, there is considerable meandering across the region. Image 7

depicts these fluvial dynamics, showing how the river changes its course over time.

14
Image 6: A picture of the Middle Course/Seaforth's typical form

Image 7: A picture of the Middle Course/Seaforth's meandering

15
Additionally, the most noticeable fluvial feature found at Seaforth in the middle course of the

Morant River was river rapids, as shown in Image 8. These rapids are usually created by the

differential erosion of alternating bands of hard and soft rock, where the lower-resistant soft rock

erodes more quickly than the harder, more resistant hard rock, creating an uneven riverbed. This

difference in resistance makes the water flow turbulent, which forms rapids.

Image 8: An image of the Seaforth/Middle Course river rapids

On the other hand, as seen in Image 9, Hillside, which is situated in the upper channel of the

Morant River, has a greater degree of meandering. This is typical of the river's efforts to move

through more difficult terrain. Furthermore, a wider range of fluvial features, such as waterfalls

and interlocking spurs, which are characteristic of upper course river dynamics, may be seen

16
here. As shown in Image 10, these forms are the consequence of the river cutting downhill into

the terrain and vertical erosion.

Image 9: Images Exploring the Hillside/Upper Course

17
 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

According to Leopold, Wolman, and Miller (1964), the hydraulic radius is a measure of channel

efficiency, calculated as the cross-sectional area divided by the wetted perimeter. A larger

hydraulic radius signifies a more efficient stream, as it indicates less resistance to flow along the

riverbed and banks. In this study, Seaforth (middle course) had a hydraulic radius of 3.12 m³,

while Hillside (upper course) recorded 2.23 m³, suggesting that Seaforth possesses a higher level

of stream efficiency. This is because reduced friction at Seaforth allows for smoother water

movement, and a greater volume of water is available to transport sediment and erode the

channel. Additionally, Seaforth’s wider channel width of 23 m, compared to Hillside’s 16 m,

supports the occurrence of increased lateral erosion in the middle course. These variations in

hydraulic radius and channel morphology are illustrated in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Bar Graph Showing the Hydraulic Radius of the Morant River

According to Knighton (1998), a hydraulically efficient channel shape is one that allows water to

flow with minimal friction, resulting in greater stream efficiency. The shape of a river channel

directly influences the wetted perimeter, which is the amount of the river's cross-section in

contact with its bed and banks. For example, narrow and deep channels have a smaller wetted

18
perimeter, which reduces friction and increases stream efficiency. In contrast, wide and shallow

channels have a larger wetted perimeter, which increases friction and reduces efficiency. In the

case of the Morant River, although both the upper course (Hillside) and middle course (Seaforth)

have similar depths, Seaforth's wider channel allows for more efficient water flow. On the other

hand, Hillside’s narrower width limits this efficiency due to increased friction.

​ According to Davies and Jones (2006), discharge refers to the volume of water flowing in

a river per second, typically measured in cubic meters per second (m³/s). A higher discharge

means the river possesses more energy, reduced friction per unit of water, and a greater capacity

to transport sediment and shape the landscape—all of which contribute to improved stream

efficiency. At Seaforth (middle course), the river discharge is 1.37 m³/s, slightly higher than the

1.31 m³/s recorded at Hillside (upper course). Though the difference is modest, it still indicates

that the middle course has a greater discharge, meaning it allows more water to pass through per

second, resulting in higher stream efficiency. In contrast, the upper course transports less water,

limiting its efficiency. This relationship is depicted in Figure 7 below.

Figure 7: Column Chart Showing a Comparison in River Discharge of Hillside and Seaforth

19
Overall, the findings show that stream efficiency improves as the river flows downstream. This is

proven by the middle course at Seaforth, which has a wider and deeper channel and allows water

to flow more smoothly compared to the upper course at Hillside.

20
 CONCLUSION

This study set out to examine how hydraulic radius, channel shape, and discharge affect the

stream efficiency of the Morant River by comparing its upper course at Hillside with the middle

course at Seaforth. The results clearly show that the middle course at Seaforth is more stream

efficient than the upper course. This is demonstrated by a higher hydraulic radius (3.12 m), wider

channel width (23 m), and slightly greater discharge rate (1.37 m³/s). These findings are

consistent with fluvial geographic models, such as Bradshaw’s Model, which explain that river

efficiency tends to increase downstream due to reduced friction, wider channels, and greater

volume of water. In addition, erosion processes contribute to smoother, more efficient flow

conditions as rivers progress toward their lower course. The investigation successfully met its

objectives, highlighting the direct influence of physical channel characteristics on stream

efficiency and supporting the theoretical frameworks studied.

21
 RECOMMANDATIONS

Three of the many suggestions that might be used are as follows:

●​ Include more sampling sites across the river’s course, particularly in the lower course, to

provide a more comprehensive comparison and strengthen the reliability of conclusions

drawn.

●​ Incorporate more advanced technological tools, such as waterproof cameras or sonar

devices, to enhance the accuracy of channel depth measurements and capture clearer

observations of riverbed features.

●​ Broaden the investigation to consider human activities, examining how land use,

pollution, or construction may also influence stream efficiency alongside natural

processes.

22
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Davies, D., & Jones, E. (2006). Geography: An integrated approach (4th ed.). Oxford: Nelson

Thornes.

Changing Channel Characteristics. Cool Geography. Retrieved from

https://www.coolgeography.co.uk/A-level/AQA/Year%2012/Rivers_Floods/Channel%20charact

eristics/Channel%20Characteristics.htm

Changing Channel Characteristics – Cross Profile, Wetted Perimeter, Hydraulic Radius etc.

(2023, April 2). A Level Geography. Retrieved from

https://www.alevelgeography.com/changing-channel-characteristics-cross-profile-wetted-perimet

er-hydraulic-radius-etc/

IB Geography - River Discharge and Stream Flow. Geo41. Retrieved from

https://www.geo41.com/discharge#:~:text=The%20hydraulic%20radius%20is%20a,the%20more

%20efficient%20the%20river

Knighton, D. (1998). Fluvial forms and processes: A new perspective. London: Arnold.

Leopold, L.B., Wolman, M.G., & Miller, J.P. (1964). Fluvial processes in geomorphology. San

Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Stream Dynamics. (n.d.). Stream discharge and flow characteristics. Retrieved from

https://www.streamdynamics.us/stream-discharge

Waugh, D. (2009). Geography: An integrated approach (3rd ed.). Nelson Thornes.

23
 APPENDIX

LOCALITY 1 ______________________________________________

Altitude of this locality ____________________

Suggest the developmental stage of the river. Give a reason/s for your answer

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

Observe and name the landforms/features found at this field site. Where sediments are

observed, describe its shape, size and composition.

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

Measurements:

Channel Width– This will be done by extending the tape measure across the surface of the

water from one point on the bank directly opposite to another point on the bank.

24
Width = __________________

Channel Depth - This will be done by using a meter ruler from the water surface to the

riverbed. Record the depth of the channel for every 1 meter across the river.

Width

(m)

Depth

(cm)

Width

(m)

Mean depth - calculate the average of depth measurement.

= _____________________

25
Cross-sectional Area (m 2 ) = width x mean depth (show working)

______________________________________________________________________

Measure the Wetted Perimeter: total length of bed and bank sides (using the chain method)

______________________________________________________________________

River Velocity - that is, the speed of the river.

● Select a point upstream to start measuring.

● Measure 10m downstream.

● Place a float in the water at the upstream starting point.

● Start timing as you release the float.

● Stop timing when the float reaches the downstream ending point.

26
Do the velocity measurement for 2 points across the channel and repeat the velocity test 5

times to work out the average velocity across the channel.

Velocity Data

Position Position Position Position

1 2 3 4

Trial 1 (seconds)

Trial 2 (seconds)

Trial 3 (seconds)

Mean Time

Velocity (m/s)

River Discharge (m3/s) = Cross-sectional area (m2) x velocity (m/s) (show working)

​ = _______________________________________________

Hydraulic Radius = wetted perimeter/cross-sectional area (show working)

= _______________________________________________________________

27
Sediment Analysis - Select and measure a sample of sediment across the river channel.

N.b. Do not look at the sediments as you pick them up from the riverbed.

●​ Measure the size - long axis x short axis.

●​ Compare to Power’s Scale of Roundness

Bedload Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Bedload Size

(long axis x short axis)

Bedload Roundness

Cross-section of the Valley -

●​ Plot a diagram of the valley using the width and depth of the channel to show the main

features

●​ Add other features and sediments to the channel where observed.

What do you suggest is/are the process/es operating along the channel/valley of the river?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

28
LOCALITY 2 ______________________________________________

Altitude of this locality ____________________

Suggest the developmental stage of the river. Give a reason/s for your answer

______________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Observe and name the landforms/features found at this field site. Where sediments are observed,

describe its shape, size, and composition.

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________

Measurements:

Channel Width– This will be done by extending the tape measure across the surface of the

water from one point on the bank directly opposite to another point on the bank.

Width = __________________

29
Channel Depth - This will be done by using a meter ruler from the water surface to the riverbed.

Record the depth of the channel for every 1 meter across the river.

Width (m)

Depth (cm)

Width (m)

Depth (cm)

Mean depth - calculate the average of depth measurement.

= _____________________

Cross-sectional Area (m2) = width x mean depth (show working)

​ = ______________________________________________________________________

Measure the Wetted Perimeter: total length of bed and bank sides (using the chain method)

​ = ______________________________________________________________________

30
River Velocity - that is, the speed of the river.

●​ Select a point upstream to start measuring.

●​ Measure 10m downstream.

●​ Place a float in the water at the upstream starting point.

●​ Start timing as you release the float.

●​ Stop timing when the float reaches the downstream ending point.

Do the velocity measurement for 2 points across the channel and repeat the velocity test 5 times

to work out the average velocity across the channel.

Velocity Data

Position Position Position Position

1 2 3 4

Trial 1 (seconds)

Trial 2 (seconds)

Trial 3 (seconds)

Mean Time

31
 Velocity (m/s)

River Discharge (m3/s) = Cross-sectional area (m2) x velocity (m/s) (show working)

​ = _______________________________________________

Hydraulic Radius = wetted perimeter/cross-sectional area (show working)

= _______________________________________________________________

Sediment Analysis - Select and measure a sample of sediment across the river channel.

N.b. Do not look at the sediments as you pick them up from the riverbed.

●​ Measure the size - long axis x short axis.

●​ Compare to Power’s Scale of Roundness

Bedload Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Bedload Size

(long axis x short axis)

Bedload Roundness

32
Cross-section of the Valley -

●​ Plot a diagram of the valley using the width and depth of the channel to show the main

features

●​ Add other features and sediments to the channel where observed.

What do you suggest is/are the process/es operating along the channel/valley of the river?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

33
34