Journal of Hydraulic Structures

Journal of Hydraulic Structures

Meander Bend Evolution and Bank Erosion Modeling of a reach of Brahmaputra River, India using MIKE 21C Model

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Kuldeep Pareta 1
Upasana Pareta 2
1 DHI (India) Water & Environment Pvt. Ltd. Unit No. 339, Eighth Floor DLF Prime Tower. Okhla Phase-I, New Delhi - 110020. India.
2 Omaksh Consulting Pvt Ltd. D-632, 7th Avenue, Gaur City-1 Greater Noida, UP.
10.22055/jhs.2026.51623.1376
Abstract
Riverbank erosion and rapid channel migration in large braided alluvial rivers such as the Brahmaputra pose substantial risks to infrastructure, settlements, and ecological systems. This study applies a high-resolution two-dimensional hydrodynamic and morphodynamic modeling framework to investigate meander bend evolution and bank erosion processes in an actively migrating reach near Palasbari, India. Simulations under bankfull and extreme flood conditions reveal pronounced hydraulic asymmetry within the bend, with peak velocities reaching 4.83 m s⁻¹, flow depths exceeding 65 m, and significant secondary circulation generating localized reverse flows greater than 3 m s⁻¹. These high-energy conditions produced deep local scour (>30 m) along the southern outer bank, confirming its high susceptibility to erosion during frequent and extreme flood events. Scenario-based intervention analysis demonstrates that sediment-guided realignment-through dredging of the mid-channel bar and strategic sediment placement along the outer bend-effectively reduces near-bank flow intensity and secondary currents, thereby lowering erosion potential. In contrast, structural flow deflectors intensified reverse flow zones and increased local instability, highlighting the risks associated with poorly evaluated engineering measures. The findings provide new process-based insights into meander morphodynamics under extreme hydraulic forcing and demonstrate the value of integrated hydrodynamic–morphodynamic modeling for evaluating erosion mitigation strategies. The study underscores the importance of adaptive, sediment-oriented river management approaches for sustaining morphological stability in highly dynamic alluvial systems such as the Brahmaputra River.
Keywords
River morphology
erosion forecast
sediment transport
Brahmaputra River
MIKE 21C
Subjects
  1. Church M. Channel stability: morphodynamics and the morphology of rivers. In: Rowiński P, Radecki-Pawlik A, editors. Rivers – physical, fluvial and environmental processes. GeoPlanet: Earth and Planetary Sciences. Cham: Springer; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17719-9_12
  2. Lightbody AF, Kui L, Stella JC, Skorko KW, Bywater-Reyes S, Wilcox AC. Riparian vegetation and sediment supply regulate the morphodynamic response of an experimental stream to floods. Front Environ Sci. 2019;7:40. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2019.00040
  3. Nittrouer JA, Shaw J, Lamb MP, Mohrig D. Spatial and temporal trends for water-flow velocity and bed-material sediment transport in the lower Mississippi River. GSA Bull. 2012;124(3-4):400–414. https://doi.org/10.1130/B30497.1
  4. Hooke J. Morphodynamics of active meandering rivers reviewed in a hierarchy of spatial and temporal scales. Geomorphology. 2023;439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2023.108825
  5. Thomas R, Nicholas A. Simulation of braided river flow using a new cellular routing scheme. Geomorphology. 2002;43:179–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-555x(01)00128-3
  6. Kasprak A, Brasington J, Hafen K, Williams RD, Wheaton JM. Modelling braided river morphodynamics using a particle travel length framework. Earth Surf Dyn. 2019;7:247–274. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-7-247-2019
  7. Kulnu AS, Hazarika N, Bharali P. Evolution and morphodynamics of the large-braided river Brahmaputra during the last four decades of the Quaternary epoch: a spatio-temporal assessment using geoinformatics. Int J River Basin Manag. 2024:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2024.2421372
  8. Church M, Ferguson RI. Morphodynamics: rivers beyond steady state. Water Resour Res. 2015;51(4):1883–1897. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016862
  9. Hohensinner S, Hauer C, Muhar S. River morphology, channelization, and habitat restoration. In: Schmutz S, Sendzimir J, editors. Riverine ecosystem management. Aquatic Ecology Series. Vol. 8. Cham: Springer; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73250-3_3
  10. Schuurman F, Marra WA, Kleinhans MG. Physics-based modeling of large-braided sand-bed rivers: bar pattern formation, dynamics, and sensitivity. J Geophys Res Earth Surf. 2013;118(4):2509–2527. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JF002896
  11. Williams RD, Brasington J, Hicks DM. Numerical modelling of braided river morphodynamics: review and future challenges. Geogr Compass. 2016;10(3):102–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12260
  12. Hicks DM, Baynes ERC, Measures R, Stecca G, Tunnicliffe J, Friedrich H. Morphodynamic research challenges for braided river environments: lessons from the iconic case of New Zealand. Earth Surf Process Landf. 2021;46(1):188–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.5014
  13. Pareta K. Morphological study of Brahmaputra River in Assam based on historical Landsat satellite imagery from 1996 to 2020. Am J Environ Sustain Dev. 2021;6(2). http://www.aiscience.org/journal/paperInfo/ajesd?paperId=5293
  14. Tubaldi E, White CJ, Patelli E, Mitoulis SA, de Almeida G, Brown J, Cranston M, Hardman M, Koursari E, Lamb R, McDonald H, Mathews R, Newell R, Pizarro A, Roca M, Zonta D. Invited perspectives: challenges and future directions in improving bridge flood resilience. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 2022;22:795–812. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-795-2022
  15. Uddin MJ, Shakik A, Mim FB. Understanding the impact of bridge structure on river morphology through geospatial techniques: case on Teesta River, Bangladesh. Discover Environ. 2024;2:91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44274-024-00136-z
  16. Wright N, Crosato A. The hydrodynamics and morphodynamics of rivers. In: Wilderer P, editor. Treatise on water science. Vol. 2. Oxford: Academic Press; 2011. p.135–156. https://www.academia.edu/23806974/The_Hydrodynamics_and_Morphodynamics_of_Rivers
  17. Ashmore P. Morphology and dynamics of braided rivers. In: Shroder J, Wohl E, editors. Treatise on geomorphology. Vol. 9: fluvial geomorphology. San Diego: Academic Press; 2013. p.289–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374739-6.00242-6
  18. Eke E, Parker G, Shimizu Y. Numerical modeling of erosional and depositional bank processes in migrating river bends with self-formed width: morphodynamics of bar push and bank pull. J Geophys Res Earth Surf. 2014;119(7):1455–1483. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JF003020
  19. Chadwick AJ, Steel E, Passalacqua P, Paola C. Differential bank migration limits the lifespan and width of braided channel threads. Water Resour Res. 2022;58(8). https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR031236
  20. Wal MVD. Bank protection structures along the Brahmaputra-Jamuna River, a study of flow slides. Water. 2020;12(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092588
  21. Pareta K. River morphological modelling of Brahmaputra River, Assam. Int J Hydropower Civ Eng. 2021;2(2):8–17. https://www.civilengineeringjournals.com/ijhce/article/13/3-1-1-892.pdf
  22. Debnath J, Sahariah D, Lahon D, Nath N, Chand K, Meraj G, Kumar P, Singh SK, Kanga S, Farooq M. Assessing the impacts of current and future changes of the planforms of river Brahmaputra on its land use-land cover. Geosci Front. 2023;14(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101557
  23. Sarma JN. Fluvial process and morphology of the Brahmaputra River in Assam, India. Geomorphology. 2005;70(3-4):226–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2005.02.007
  24. Gautam S, Singh A, Dhanya CT, Chandrika. Increased socio-economic vulnerability in the floodplains of Brahmaputra Basin, India. vEGU21, the 23rd EGU General Assembly. 2021. https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU21/EGU21-3193.html
  25. Pareta K. River morphology of braided Brahmaputra River, Assam, India. Chisinau: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, Republic of Moldova; 2022. p.1–444. https://www.morebooks.shop/shop-ui/shop/book-launch-offer/1471e9b08e1f2677f4f2c18a12d1dbe6e60d2cdc
  26. Sarker S, Sarker T, Leta OT, Raihan SU, Ahmed N. Understanding the planform complexity and morphodynamic properties of Brahmaputra River in Bangladesh: protection and exploitation of riparian areas. Water. 2023;15(7):1384. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15071384
  27. Summer S, Walling DE. Modelling erosion, sediment transport and sediment yield. IHP-VI Technical Documents in Hydrology No. 60. Paris: UNESCO; 2002. https://www.hydrology.nl/images/docs/ihp/2002_Modelling_erosion_sediment_127848e.pdf
  28. Pareta K, Jakobsen F, Joshi M. Morphological characteristics and vulnerability assessment of Alaknanda, Bhagirathi, Mandakini and Kali rivers, Uttarakhand (India). Am J Geophys Geochem Geosyst. 2019;5(2):49–68. http://www.aiscience.org/journal/paperInfo/aj3g?paperId=4645
  29. Mir AA, Patel M. A comprehensive review on sediment transport, flow dynamics, and hazards in steep channels. J Water Manag Model. 2024. https://doi.org/10.14796/JWMM.C517
  30. Andualem TG, Hewa GA, Myers BR, Peters S, Boland J. Erosion and sediment transport modeling: a systematic review. Land. 2023;12(7):1396. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12071396
  31. Hu Y, Yang H, Zhou H, Lv Q. A review of numerical modelling of morphodynamics in braided rivers: mechanisms, insights and challenges. Water. 2023;15(3):595. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15030595
  32. Pareta K. 1D-2D hydrodynamic and sediment transport modelling using MIKE models. Discover Water. 2024;4:94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43832-024-00130-9
  33. Brown RA. Hydrogeomorphic scaling and ecohydraulics for designing rescaled channel and floodplain geometry in regulated gravel–cobble bed rivers for Pacific salmon habitat. Water. 2022;14(4):670. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14040670
  34. Odey G, Cho Y. Event-based vs. continuous hydrological modeling with HEC-HMS: a review of use cases, methodologies, and performance metrics. Hydrology. 2025;12(2):39. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology12020039
  35. Darby S, Sear D. River restoration: managing the uncertainty in restoring physical habitat. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2008. https://www.academia.edu/Documents/in/River_Restoration?swp=tc-ri-1156513
  36. Javernick L, Hicks DM, Measures R, Caruso B, Brasington J. Numerical modelling of braided rivers with structure-from-motion-derived terrain models. River Res Appl. 2015;32(5):1071–1081. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2918
  37. Kasvi E, Alho P, Lotsari E, Wang Y, Kukko A, Hyyppä H, Hyyppä J. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional computational models in hydrodynamic and morphodynamic reconstructions of a river bend: sensitivity and functionality. Hydrol Process. 2014;29(6):1604–1629. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10277
  38. Horvat Z, Isic M, Spasojevic M. Two-dimensional river flow and sediment transport model. Environ Fluid Mech. 2015;15:595–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-014-9375-y
  39. Zhang Y, Al-Hamdan M, Wren D. Development of a two-dimensional hybrid sediment-transport model. Appl Sci. 2023;13(8):4940. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13084940
  40. Lai YG, Thomas RE, Ozeren Y, Simon A, Greimann BP, Wu K. Modeling of multilayer cohesive bank erosion with a coupled bank stability and mobile-bed model. Geomorphology. 2015;243:116–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.07.017
  41. Lai YG. Modeling stream bank erosion: practical stream results and future needs. Water. 2017;9(12):950. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9120950
  42. Dubuis R, Cesare GD. The clogging of riverbeds: a review of the physical processes. Earth-Science Reviews. 2023;239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2023.104374
  43. Morianou GG, Kourgialas NN, Karatzas GP, Nikolaidis NP. Hydraulic and sediment transport simulation of Koiliaris River using the MIKE 21C model. Procedia Engineering. 2016;162C:463–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.089
  44. Vozinaki AEK, Morianou GG, Alexakis DD, Tsanis IK. Comparing 1D and combined 1D/2D hydraulic simulations using high-resolution topographic data: a case study of the Koiliaris basin, Greece. Hydrol Sci J. 2016;62(4):642–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1255746
  45. MIKE 21C curvilinear model – scientific documentation. Horsholm: Danish Hydraulic Institute; 2022. https://manuals.mikepoweredbydhi.help/latest/Water_Resources/MIKE21C_Scientific_documentation.pdf
  46. Ackers P, White WR. Sediment transport – new approach and analysis. J Hydraul Div. 1973;99(11):2041–2060. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/JYCEAJ.0003791
  47. Borden C, Gaur A, Singh CR. Water resource software: application overview and review. Washington (DC): World Bank; 2016. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/279391467995445292/pdf/106396-WP-PUBLIC-WRS-SAWI-reportjune8.pdf
  48. Enggrob HG, Tjerry S. Simulation of morphological characteristics of a braided river. In: River, Coastal and Estuarine Morphodynamics (RCEM) Proceedings; 1998. https://www.dhigroup.com/upload/publications/mike21/Vested_2014.pdf
  49. Vested HJ, Tjerry S, Christensen BB, Dubinski IM. Numerical simulation of estuarine and river morphology. In: International Conference on Small Scale Morphological Evolution of Coastal, Estuarine and River Systems; Nantes; 2014.
  50. Zongo J, Zabsonre JDD, Roamba B. Formal derivation of a new sediment transport model using a multiscale procedure: numerical validation. Partial Differ Equ Appl Math. 2024;9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.padiff.2023.100606
  51. Aksoy H, Mahe G, Meddi M. Modeling and practice of erosion and sediment transport under change. Water. 2019.
  52. Sarker S. Essence of MIKE 21C (FDM numerical scheme): application on the river morphology of Bangladesh. Open J Model Simul. 2022;10:88–117. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=116189
  53. Pareta K. Morphological model for erosion prediction of India’s largest braided river using MIKE 21C model. Earth Sci Syst Soc. 2024;4. https://doi.org/10.3389/esss.2024.10075
  54. Ramakrishnan R, Rajawat AS. Simulation of suspended sediment transport initialized with satellite derived suspended sediment concentrations. J Earth Syst Sci. 2012;121:1201–1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-012-0222-6
  55. Dang TA, Tran TH. Application of the MIKE21C model to simulate flow in the lower Mekong River basin. SpringerPlus. 2016;5:1982. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3637-8
  56. Karmaker T, Dutta S. Prediction of short-term morphological change in large braided river using 2D numerical model. J Hydraul Eng. 2016;142(10). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001167
  57. Morianou GG, Kourgialas NN, Karatzas GP, Nikolaidis NP. Assessing hydro-morphological changes in Mediterranean stream using curvilinear grid modeling approach – climate change impacts. Earth Sci Inform. 2018;11:205–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-017-0326-2
  58. Wang Q, Peng W, Dong F, Liu X, Ou N. Simulating flow of an urban river course with complex cross sections based on the MIKE 21 FM model. Water. 2020;12(3):761. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12030761
  59. Pareta K. Morphological dynamics of braided river near Bogibeel bridge, Assam. Int J Environ Plan Manag. 2021;7(3):72–86. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Morphological-Dynamics-of-Braided-River-Near-Assam-Pareta/1e5ab6aecec070f531aef7da770f1abf2ac1507e
  60. Le Xuan T, Nguyen Cong P, Vo Quoc T, Tran QQ, Wright DP, Anh DT. Multi-scale modelling for hydrodynamic and morphological changes of breakwater in coastal Mekong Delta in Vietnam. J Coast Conserv. 2022;26:18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-022-00866-3
  61. Sarker S. Separation of floodplain flow and bankfull discharge: application of 1D momentum equation solver and MIKE 21C. CivilEng. 2023;4(3):933–948. https://doi.org/10.3390/civileng4030050
  62. Samir F. The impact of flow reduction on the river morphology during bridge rehabilitation. Ain Shams Eng J. 2025;16(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2025.103359
  63. Jiang C, Parteli JR, Shao Y. A model for regional-scale water erosion and sediment transport and its application to the Yellow River Basin. J Adv Model Earth Syst. 2025;7(5). https://doi.org/10.1029/2024MS004593
  64. Coleman JM. Brahmaputra river: channel processes and sedimentation. Sediment Geol. 1969;3(2–3):129–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0037-0738(69)90010-4
  65. Fischer S, Pietroń J, Bring A, Thorslund J, Jarsjö J. Present to future sediment transport of the Brahmaputra River: reducing uncertainty in predictions and management. Reg Environ Change. 2017;17:515–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1039-7
  66. Yannan J, Haining H. A new era for Tibet’s rivers. Dialogue Earth. 2011. https://dialogue.earth/en/energy/4055-a-new-era-for-tibet-s-rivers/
  67. Mahanta C, et al. Physical assessment of the Brahmaputra River. Dhaka: IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature; 2014. p.xii + 74. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2014-083.pdf
  68. Samaranayake N, Limaye S, Wuthnow J. Water resource competition in the Brahmaputra River Basin: China, India and Bangladesh. CAN analysis and solution; 2016. https://www.cna.org/archive/CNA_Files/pdf/cna-brahmaputra-study-2016.pdf
  69. Yasuda Y, Aich D, Hill D, Huntjens P, Swain A. Transboundary water cooperation over the Brahmaputra River: legal political economy analysis of current and future potential cooperation. The Hague: The Hague Institute for Global Justice; 2017. https://siwi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/brahmaputra-basin-report-final_design.pdf
  70. Palash W, Bajracharya SR, Shrestha AB, Wahid S, Hossain MS, Mogumder TK, Mazumder LC. Climate change impacts on the hydrology of the Brahmaputra River Basin. Climate. 2023;11(1):18. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli11010018
  71. Mahanta C, Zaman AM, Newaz SMS, Rahman SMM, Mazumdar TK, Choudhury R, Borah PJ, Saikia L. Physical assessment of the Brahmaputra River: ecosystems for life, a Bangladesh-India initiative. Dhaka: IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature; 2014. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2014-083.pdf
  72. Chauhan P, Singh N, Chauniyal DD, et al. Differential behaviour of a Lesser Himalayan watershed in extreme rainfall regimes. J Earth Syst Sci. 2017;126:22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-017-0796-0
  73. Rao MP, Cook ER, Cook BI, et al. Seven centuries of reconstructed Brahmaputra River discharge demonstrate underestimated high discharge and flood hazard frequency. Nat Commun. 2020;11:6017. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19795-6
  74. Vaithiyanathan P, Ramanathan AL, Subramanian V. Erosion, transport and deposition of sediments by the tropical rivers of India. In: Sediment budgets, proceedings of the Porto Alegre Symposium. IAHS Publ No. 174; 1988. https://iahs.info/uploads/dms/iahs_174_0561.pdf
  75. Raff JL, Goodbred SL, Pickering JL, et al. Sediment delivery to sustain the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta under climate change and anthropogenic impacts. Nat Commun. 2023;14:2429. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-38057-9
  76. Jiang C, Zhang L, Li D, Li F. Water discharge and sediment load changes in China: change patterns, causes, and implications. Water. 2015;7(10):5849–5875. https://doi.org/10.3390/w7105849
  77. Zhang L, Ssu F, Yang D, Hao Z, Tong K. Discharge regime and simulation for the upstreams of major rivers over Tibetan Plateau. J Geophys Res Atmos. 2013;118(15):8500–8515. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50665
  78. Sarma JN. Water resources of the Brahmaputra: viabilities and apprehensions of its transfer to other rivers. In: Proceedings of the National Seminar on Linking the Major Rivers of India, Possibilities and Apprehensions. Assam Science Society; 2003. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282866677_WATER_RESOURCES_OF_THE_BRAHMAPUTRA_VIABILITIES_AND_APPREHENSIONS_OF_ITS_TRANSFER_TO_OTHER_RIVER
  79. Pangare G, Nishat B, Liao X, Qaddumi HM. The restless river. Washington (DC): World Bank; 2021. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/267471631520173475/pdf/The-Restless-River-Yarlung-Tsangpo-Siang-Brahmaputra-Jamuna.pdf
  80. Morphological studies of the river Brahmaputra. New Delhi: Northeastern Council, Govt. of India; 1993.
  81. Langendoen EJ. CONCEPTS – conservational channel evolution and pollutant transport system, stream corridor version-1(i). Research report no. 16. Oxford (MS): USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory; 2000. https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/60600505/TechnicalReports/NSLTechnicalReport16.pdf
  82. Pareta K. Two-dimensional morphological model for prediction of erosion of a reach of Brahmaputra River using MIKE 21C software with hydrodynamics and river morphology modules. 2023;2:445–456. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/rvr2.64
  83. Bhattacharya NN, Bora AK. Floods of the Brahmaputra River in India. Water Int. 1997;22(4). https://lib.icimod.org/records/gwqhb-h2766
  84. Roy NG, Sinha R. Linking hydrology and sediment dynamics of large alluvial rivers to landscape diversity in the Ganga dispersal system, India. Earth Surf Process Landf. 2016;42(7):1078–1091. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4074
  85. Word JQ, Kauwling TJ, Mearns AJ. A comparative field study of benthic sampling devices. Task report to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA Grant No. R801152); 1976.
  86. Stubbs HH, Diehl DW, Hershelman GP. A Van Veen grab sampling method. Technical report 276. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Authority; 1987. https://ftp.sccwrp.org/pub/download/DOCUMENTS/TechnicalReports/0204_VanVeen.pdf
  87. Amsterdam EV. Construction materials for civil engineering. Juta and Company Ltd; 2000. p.16.
  88. Sediment transportation mechanics – sediment discharge formulas. Task Committee for Preparation of Sediment Manual, Committee on Sedimentation of the Hydraulics Division. J Hydraul Div. 1971;97(4). https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/JYCEAJ.0002933
  89. Goswami DC. Brahmaputra River, Assam, India: physiography, basin denudation, and channel aggradation. Water Resour Res. 1985;21(7):959–978. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR021i007p00959
  90. Karmakar P, Das PK, Sarkar S, Karmakar S, Mazumdar D. Association study between lead and zinc accumulation at different physiological systems of cattle by canonical correlation and canonical correspondence analyses. Environ Ecol. 2010;28(4):2321–2325.
  91. Akbar Z, Pasha GA, Tanaka N, Ghani U, Hamidifar H. Reducing bed scour in meandering channel bends using spur dikes. Int J Sediment Res. 2024;39(2):243–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2024.01.001
  92. Koohizadeh Dehkordi A, Fatahi Nafchi R, Samadi-Boroujeni H, Khastar Boroujeni M, Ostad-Ali-Askari K. Assessment of morphological changes of riverbank erosion using Landsat satellite time-series images. Ain Shams Eng J. 2024;15(3):102455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2023.102455
  93. Zhang GH, Luo RT, Cao Y, Shen RC, Zhang XC. Impacts of sediment load on Manning coefficient in supercritical shallow flow on steep slopes. Hydrol Process. 2010;24(6):3909–3914. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7892
  94. Engelund F, Hansen E. A monograph on sediment transport in alluvial streams. Copenhagen: Teknisk Forlag, Danish Technical Press, Danish Technological University; 1967. http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:81101b08-04b5-4082-9121-861949c336c9
  95. Benavides-Munoz HM, Roman-Aguilar KM. Hydrodynamic modeling and flood mitigation strategies in an Andean valley city. PLOS Water. 2025;4(7):e0000397. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000397