GEOGRAPHY - BANHAM 2022

The Birsig
An investigation into the changes in downstream variables in the river Birsig.

Figure 1 - An Image Of The River Birsig - (Gramespacher and Drescher)

RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Do the variables in the river Birsig change in

accordance with the Bradshaw model?

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Location Detail

Figure 2 - Map Of The Birsig River (Map of

Switzerland)

The Birsig river is a small river that flows through Easter France and northern Switzerland,

shown above in Figure 2. The source is in the small town of Burg Im Leimental, near

Biederthal, which is near the Swiss border, marked on the map above in red pen. This river

is approximately 21 kilometers long and its watershed area spans over 82 kilometers 2

2
("Birsig"). The Birsig river starts at a high elevation of approximately 625 meters and

eventually flows through Swiss and French territory, converging with the Rhine in Basel at

260 meters (Map of Switzerland). Along the way, various tributaries, such as the Binnbach

and Marchbach (outlined in red), all converge and feed into the Birsig channel (outlined in

green), shown on the right in Figure 3. This river also passes through many important

towns in the Basel-Landschaft and Basel-

Land area. These are towns such as Biel-

Benken, Oberwil Zentrum, Stallen,

Schloss, Dorenbach and many others.

1.2 Hypothesis

My hypothesis for this

investigation is that the velocity of the

river will increase as you go further

downstream in the Birsig and farther

away from the source. This will be in

accordance with the Bradshaw model, outlined below in section 1.3 Theory To Justify

Hypothesis.

1.3 Theory To Justify Hypothesis

The Bradshaw model agrees with my hypothesis in

that the velocity of a river will increase as you move

downstream. This occurs because the hydraulic radius

increases, the channel bed roughness decreases, as the

load particle size decreases and finally because the

discharge of the river increases, as shown to the right in

Figure
Figure 4, a diagram of the Bradshaw model. All of these 3 - Two River Converging
With The Birsig (Map of

3 Figure 4 - The
Bradshaw Model
(TES)
factors contribute to increasing the velocity of a river because the channel bed roughness

decreases, meaning that there is less friction with the bed and banks. Less energy is lost

with less friction, meaning that the river can flow smoother and faster. Similarly, with

smaller load particle size means that there is also less friction, meaning that the river can

flow faster without losing as much energy as it would upstream. Discharge contributes to

increasing velocity as it increases the hydraulic radius. The hydraulic radius is calculated by

dividing the cross-sectional area, the area of the amount of water, by the wetted perimeter.

The cross-sectional area increases as discharge increases as the amount of water,

discharge, and flow past a certain point will definitely increase the cross-sectional area. The

hydraulic radius increases velocity as the higher the hydraulic radius, proportionally less of

the water is in contact with the bed and banks when compared to a smaller hydraulic

radius (this is illustrated to the right in Figure 5). The proportion of the river that is in

contact with the bed and banks is significant because 95% of the river's energy is lost to the

beds and banks of rivers. So, due to the fact that hydraulic radius increases as you go

downstream, the less proportion of water is in contact with the bed and

banks when going downstream, thus meaning that less

energy is lost. This then allows the river to flow faster.

However, why do all these variables increase as

they go downstream? Discharge increases due to

tributaries converging with the main stem, causing

more water to flow downstream. This in turn both

increases the cross-sectional area and wetted

perimeter, as a bigger river is needed to hold all the

water. These increases in cross-sectional area and wetted perimeter also cause an increase

in the hydraulic radius as mentioned above. Additionally, the load particle size and the

channel bed roughness decreases due to the process of attrition. The rocks crash into each

other in the river, causing the sharp edges to be knocked off. In knocking off the sharp

Hyd
4
Hyd Wet
edge, the size will also decrease naturally. Overall, here is an explanation of the Bradshaw

model and why velocity decreases downstream.

5
2.0 Methodology

2.1 Method Plan

2.1.1 Data Needed To Test My Hypothesis

The data needed to test my hypothesis was the average flow velocity of the river

(m/s). This allows me to see how fast the river is flowing and if there is a trend as the river’s

distance from the source changes. If it were to conform with the Bradshaw model, then as I

go further downstream the m/s will generally increase with a few anomalies.

2.1.2 Data Needed To Explain My Hypothesis

Further data needed to back up my hypothesis would be the clast size (cm),

hydraulic radius (m), mode bedload roundness, and the discharge (cubic meters/s). The

mode bedload's roundness and clast size (cm) allows me to see how rough it is on the

bottom of the river, thus allowing me to see if there is lots of friction. The hydraulic radius

allows me to see the proportion of the river in contact with the bed and banks, allowing me

to see the friction and finally the discharge allows me to see how much water passes any

given point in the river. This data was collected in 9 different locations all across the span of

the Birsig river.

2.2 Methods

2.2.1 Diagram And Description of Method

1. Set-Up The Area As Shown In The Diagram Above In Figure 6.

a. Set-Up Two Ranging Poles Ten Meters Apart From Each Other

b. Make Sure That The Ranging Poles Poles Both Enter The Water At The Top Of

The Same Section

6
 c. Have A Stopwatch On Hand To Someone Standing On The Side Of The River

To Record The Time

2. Place The Ball Down Half A Meter Behind The Ranging Pole That Is Upstream From

The Other

a. This allows the ball to gain speed before starting the stopwatch instead of

dropping the ball right in next to the ranging pole.

3. Wait Until The Front End Of The Ball Goes In Front Of The Upstream Ranging Pole

And Then Start Your Stopwatch

4. Wait For The Ball To Travel Downstream Till It’s Back-End Passes The Downstream

Ranging Pole And Then Stop Your Timer

5. Record Your Time In The Data Booklet

6. Repeat Steps 2-5, 4 More Times

7. After Having Done This Add Up All The Times And Divide The Sum By 4 In Order To

Get The Average Of All Of Them

8. Repeat Steps 1-7 At The Other Sites Which You Go To

Figure 6 - How Flow

Velocity Is Measured
(Kerry)

2.2.2 Limitations And Justifications

7
 A limitation of our methodology for the measurements of flow velocity was that we

did not take the average velocity correctly. This is due to the fact that we only measured in

one area of the river, mostly likely in the middle, 5 times in a row. The middle of the river is

the fastest part of the river, while going straight, meaning that we did not take the average

of the whole river at that point, but instead the average of the fastest part of the river in

the various sites. If we were to spread out our measurements all over the width of the

river, and we were to average out the velocity in that method, then we would have the

average velocity. Furthermore, we did not have the correct equipment to get the average

velocity accurately. In order to measure the average velocity correctly, we would need to

use a current meter.

2.2.3 Site Selection Sampling

The Birsig river was chosen for site selection sampling because it is nearby, safe and

was a shallow enough river making it easier for us to collect data. If we had chosen a river

such as the Rhine, this river would have been too deep and too difficult to measure data

for. Furthermore, due to the Rhine being a 1,233 km long river (Sinnhuber and Karl). It

would have been difficult to measure the downstream and upstream areas of the river as

they are too far away. Additionally, we chose sites that were all across the river to get a

range of data from the upper course (Biederthal and Rodersdorf), middle course (Biel

Benken and Oberwil) and lower course sections (Dorrenbach and Binningen), shown in

Figure 7 below. This allowed us to see general patterns in the river such as how the velocity

generally increased with a few anomalies.

8
 Figure 7 - Sketch Map
Of The River Birsig -
(Banham)

2.2.4 Health And Safety

In terms of what precautions, we took while carrying out the method. We wore

waterproof pants and boots in order to reduce the risk of us catching certain diseases that

lie in the water, from pathogenic organisms, such as cholera, diarrhea, typhoid, hepatitis,

gastroenteritis, scabies, and worm infections. Furthermore, we tried to keep our heads

above the water, did not stay in the river for extended periods of time and also washed our

hands to get any harmful bacteria that may have been there.

3.0 Methodology

3.1 Data To Test My Hypothesis

9
 Figure 8, “Average Velocity of The Birsig (m/s) Over
The Distance From The Source (km)” - Drawn On

In the graph above, Figure 8, you can clearly see that there is a general increasing

trend. As the distance from the source (km) increases, the average velocity of the Birsig

(m/s) will also increase. This is shown by how the velocity increases from 0.1 m/s, to 0.16

m/s when going from 1km to 1.8km away from the source. Furthermore, the velocity

increases from 0.48 m/s to 0.74 m/s to 1.125 m/s when going from 6.2km to 7.7km to 9km.

However, there are two very clear anomalies in the data that was collected. The first occurs

at 5km when the average velocity decreases from 0.25 m/s at 3.5 km from the source to

0.11 m/s at 5km from the source. This occurred due to there being a stagnant part of the

water leading us to believe that it was not accurately measured. Another anomaly that

occurred in my data was at the very end of the river at 9.8km from the source. The average

velocity dramatically decreased, going from 1.125 m/s at 9km to 0.75 m/s at 9.8km. This

occurred because most of the river’s water was diverted to the zoo. Overall, the graph

above had a general increasing trend showing that as the distance from the source

increased, the velocity also increased, with a few anomalies.

3.2 Other Useful Data To Test My Hypothesis

10
 Figure 9, “Mean Bedload Size (cm)
Over The Distance From The Source
(km)” - Drawn On Graph Paper (Kerry)

In the graph above, Figure 9 you can clearly see that there is a general decreasing

trend. As the distance from the source increases (km), the mean bedload size (cm)

decreases. This was shown in my graph by how mean bedload size, clast size (cm), goes

from 6.55 cm to 4.38 cm to 2.64 cm at the respective distances of 1km, 1.8km and 2.6km

away from the source. Furthermore, the clast size (cm) decreases from 2.25 cm to 2.03 cm

to 1.48 cm at the distances of 5km, 6.2km and 7.7km away from the source. However, an

anomaly occurred in my very last data point at 9.8km away from the source. Contrary to

the previous results, the data increases from 0.99 cm, at 9km away from the source, to 4.25

cm. This occurred due to man-made objects such as bricks skewing the data and causing

an anomaly. Overall, the graph had a general decreasing trend that showed that as the

distance from the source increased, the bedload size decreased, with an anomaly.

3.3 Data Analysis

The general pattern that was shown in both my graph and the Bradshaw model was

that as the distance from the source increases than the average velocity increases. This

occurs, as explained in section 1.3 above, due to a variety of factors. Firstly, the discharge,

on average, increases due to tributaries converging with the mainstem. With more

11
discharge comes a less proportion of the water in contact with the bed and banks. With this

less water in contact with the bed and banks comes less friction. Furthermore, as shown in

Figure 9 above, the size of the bedload generally decreases, with a few anomalies, showing

how the bedload is smaller and thus there is less friction. This then will allow the river to

flow faster increasing the average velocity of the river. However, there are some anomalies

in my data. The first anomaly occurred 5km from the source. This occurred due to that area

of the river having a pool-like section where the water was almost stagnant. This

dramatically decreased the average velocity of this section causing the anomaly. The

second anomaly that occurred in my data for the average velocity occurred at the very last

data point at 9.8km away from the source. The average velocity decreased from 1.125 m/s

at 9km to 0.75 m/s at 9.8km. This occurred because there was a diversion of lots of water

to the zoo. This diversion of water to the zoo can be clearly seen in the data collected for

the discharge. You can see in this data that in the final two sites, 9 km and 9.8km away

from the source respectively, the discharge dramatically decreases from 2.883 cubic

meters/second to 1.219 cubic meters/second. This radically affected the discharge data as

stated above. Furthermore, due to the discharge decreasing this meant that the average

velocity also decreased as the proportion of the was that was in contact with the bed and

banks massively increased. Overall, the data was mostly in conjunction with the Bradshaw

model with a few anomalies.

4.0 Conclusion And Evaluation

4.1 Conclusion

12
 Overall, the variables in the Birsig change in accordance with the Bradshaw model

with this specific set of data. This was shown in my graph above through the speed of the

river increasing from 0.1 m/s to a high of 1.125 m/s. This is proved with the scientific

research done above with the Bradshaw model. With increases in cross-sectional area,

discharge, more rounded rocks as you went further downstream and increases in clast size.

This specific set of data collected ended up proving my hypothesis to be correct that

generally as you go downstream the velocity of the river will increase. However, due to the

data having various anomalies, discussed above in data analysis, we cannot make a firm

and absolute conclusion that in all rivers as you go downstream the velocity increases.

Furthermore, this river could not match the Bradshaw model certainly due to the fact that

the Birsig river is not natural. There are various human structures such as bricks, pipes or

litter in the river that would have affected our data such as velocity and clast size.

Moreover, the Birsig river was canalized through man-made structures, such as walls on

the side, in order to help prevent floods in that area. This will affect all data as the river is

no longer natural in its path. Overall, this data klset proved my hypothesis and matched the

Bradshaw model. However, due to it having various anomalies we could not make a firm

conclusion.

4.2 Evaluation

4.2.1 Validity Of The Conclusion

The validity of the conclusion could be questioned. This is due to the fact that there

is still a large possibility that all of the data could have occurred by chance. In this data set,

there were only 9 points collected. This leads us to have reasonable doubt in our data, as

more than 32 data points are required to have 5% or less probability that these results

came out by chance. So, more data is required in order to reach a firm valid conclusion.

Additionally, there were known methodology problems such as how the right equipment

13
was not used. This causes us to believe that the data collected was not in-fact reliable, and

had anomalies thus rendering our conclusion invalid.

4.2.2 Method Validity

The validity of the method could also be questioned in this experiment. There were

various anomalies in different sections of our data that suggest shortcomings in our

methods. While measuring the Thalweg, site 5, there was an anomaly in the data. Here the

average velocity (m/s) dropped from 0.25 m/s to 0.11 m/s. This is due to the fact that the

water was stagnant in this area and also due to the fact that it was not accurately

measured. In order to stop this from occurring in the future, the method for data collection

could have been more specific and extra instructions could have been given for this site in

order to accurately measure the data. Another anomaly seen in our data, that shows

shortcomings in our methods, is seen in the clast size, mean bedload size (cm). Here there

are two anomalies. There is one at the fourth site, where the bedload size (cm) dramatically

decreases from 2.64 cm to 1.94 cm. This occurred as most of the larger sediment was

trapped by tree roots. So, it was not picked up while gathering our sample for the clast size.

The second anomaly in our data occurred in the ninth site when the clast size (cm),

dramatically increases from 0.99 cm to 4.25 cm. This occurred due to the fact that there

was human intervention in the form of various bricks skewing the average bedload size

(cm). Both of these anomalies could have been avoided through greater detail and

instruction in the methods. Furthermore, different sites could have been selected where

there were more natural sections of the river in order to get more authentic data. Overall,

there were various anomalies in our data that could have been fixed through changes in

our methodology leading to more reliable and valid results.

4.2.3 Investigation Improvements And Extensions

As discussed above, this experiment could have been improved in various ways.

This is shown through the various anomalies in our data caused by human error, lack of

14
detail, and through not being able to achieve a firm conclusion. One facet in which our

investigation could have been improved is the environment of the collection of data. This

data was collected over several days, however, in the following days there were a series of

storms and showers. This would have affected lots of the data collected including, hydraulic

radius, discharge, clast size and roundness, velocity as well as other pieces of data. In order

to prevent this situation in the future all the data could be collected in one day. We could

also improve this investigation through changing the equipment used during data

collection. While collecting the wetted perimeter a tape measure was used to do this.

However, this was quite difficult, unreliable and uncomfortable to do. So, instead a chain

could be used in order to measure the wetted perimeter as this would automatically lay at

the bottom of the channel allowing us to measure the wetted perimeter much quicker.

Additionally, while collecting the average velocity a flow meter could have been used

instead of a ball as this would allow us to get an average of how fast the whole river

channel is instead of just a small section of the river, as mentioned previously in 2.2.2.

Finally, I feel that this investigation was thorough in its data collection and couldn’t do

much more to extend itself.

5.0 Works Cited List

Bahnham, Carl. "Sketch Map of River Birsig." Accessed 4 Oct. 2022. Course Handout.

"Birsig." Route You, www.routeyou.com/en-ch/location/view/47873688/birsig. Accessed 4 Oct. 2022.

Gramespacher, and Drescher. Das größte Hochwasserrisiko geht nicht etwa vom Rhein aus (rechts

beim Hochwasser 2007), sondern vom Birsig, der auf dem Bild links, zwischen Zoo und

Heuwaage harmlos dahinplätschert. Badische Zeitung, www.badische-zeitung.de/birsig-

koennte-innenstadt-in-basel-ueberfluten--101364810.html. Accessed 4 Oct. 2022.

15
Kerry, Charles. Average Velocity of The Birsig (m/s) Over The Distance From The Source (km). Google

Docs. Chart.

---. Flow Velocity How It Is Measured.

---. Mean Bedload Size (cm) Over The Distance From The Source (km). Google Docs. Chart.

---. "Wetted Perimeter." Accessed 4 Oct. 2022. Infographic.

Map of Switzerland. Map Geo Admin, map.geo.admin.ch/?

lang=en&topic=ech&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-

farbe&layers=ch.swisstopo.zeitreihen,ch.bfs.gebaeude_wohnungs_register,ch.bav.haltestelle

n-oev,ch.swisstopo.swisstlm3d-wanderwege,ch.astra.wanderland-

sperrungen_umleitungen&layers_opacity=1,1,1,0.8,0.8&layers_visibility=false,false,false,false,

false&layers_timestamp=18641231,,,, Accessed 4 Oct. 2022. Map.

TES. www.tes.com/teaching-resource/ocr-a-gcse-geography-9-1-how-does-the-profile-of-a-river-

change-downstream-12537046. Accessed 4 Oct. 2022.

Sinnhuber, Karl A. and Mutton, Alice F.A.. "Rhine River". Encyclopedia Britannica, 3 Apr. 2020,

https://www.britannica.com/place/Rhine-River. Accessed 4 October 2022.

16