To what extent does the River Derwent conform to the Bradshaw Model in terms of discharge,

velocity, load particle size, and channel depth?

(David, 2014)

GEOGRAPHY IA

Word count:

1
Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
Geographical background - ........................................................................................................................... 3
Key Theory –................................................................................................................................................. 3
Location of fieldwork – ................................................................................................................................. 4
Hypothesis –................................................................................................................................................. 6
Link to syllabus – .......................................................................................................................................... 6
Methodology.................................................................................................................................................... 7
Data presentation & analysis .......................................................................................................................... 10
Data Presentation 1 – E.g. Located cross sectional area line graphs ............................................................. 10
Analysis 1 – e.g. Cross sectional area........................................................................................................... 11
Data Presentation 2 – ................................................................................................................................. 11
Analysis 2 - ................................................................................................................................................. 12
Data Presentation 3 – ................................................................................................................................. 14
Analysis 3 –................................................................................................................................................. 14
Data Presentation 4 – ................................................................................................................................. 14
Analysis 4 - ................................................................................................................................................. 14
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................................... 17
Evaluation ...................................................................................................................................................... 19
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................... 20

2
Introduction

Geographical background -

The River Derwent is the river chosen for the investigation of whether rivers in the modern day conform with
the Bradshaw Model investigated through factors such as discharge, velocity, load particle size and channel
depth. The river flows through Borrowdale, two lakes: Derwent Water and Bassenthwaite Lake, the West
Cumbrian plain and then west towards the sea (Grace & John, 2015). Historically, the area was used for mining
during the industrial revolution due to the abundance of minerals like slate, granite, and limestone. But currently,
the river provides local opportunities through, for example, tourism, transport, and fishing industries
(Environment Agency, Lake District National Park Authority, 1999). The catchment is very steep and wet formed
by glacial processes during the Quaternary ice age and currently consists of a mixture of hard and soft rock. The
river is often subject to flooding, for example in 2009 and 2015, and so has undergone certain hard engineering
methods like channel straightening.

Key Theory –

The Bradshaw model is a simplified geographical model that illustrates the changes in characteristics that a river
goes through across its journey from the upper course to the lower course. It was originally coined by M J
Bradshaw in his textbook The Earth’s Changing Surface published in 1978 (GIS Wiki, 2010).

Figure 1 – The Bradshaw Model

A river’s discharge increases Channel eroded downstream

downstream because of due to abrasion, solution, and
tributaries and erosion. hydraulic action.

Velocity increases downstream

Tributaries add
from increased channel
water into the main
efficiency.
channel.
Increased discharge and velocity
Greater load downstream means downstream mean greater river
more abrasion, eroding channel energy.
verti-laterally.
Greater river energy
downstream means river can
Attrition and abrasion
carry greater load.
make load smaller,
smoother, and rounder.
Gravity causes river to flow from
steep to flatter gradient.

3
Location of fieldwork –

The River Derwent is located in the Lake District, towards the north-west of England. The data for this
investigation was retrieved from this river at 10 different sites, which were all distributed between the upper,
middle, and lower course of the river. Site 1 was located relatively close to the source of the river in a
mountainous area with steep relief and Site 10 was located towards the south-east of the source in an area of
shallower relief.
Figure 2 – Map of the UK

4
Figure 3 – Local Map

Figure 4 – Base Map

5
Hypothesis –

A hypothesis for this investigation is that the River Derwent will align itself mostly to the Bradshaw Model
because an increase in the river’s energy will likely lead to an increase in discharge, velocity, channel depth and
decreased load particle size. This can be justified by the fact that the Bradshaw model was formulated based on
observations of rivers with similar climate and geology as the River Derwent so it should conform. However,
small discrepancies can be expected from anthropogenic interactions with the river such as channel
straightening.

Link to syllabus –

Topic: Freshwater
Sub-topic: Drainage basin hydrology and geomorphology
Second Sub-topic: How physical processes influence drainage basin systems and landforms
Development: Define “river discharge.” Examine its relationship to stream flow and channel
characteristics and hydraulic radius.

6
Methodology
Sentence to describe where and when the data was collected.

Variable Sample Size Description Justification

Width Once at each site We took a tape We need to
measure and had measure this
two people hold the variable because we
ends of it. The two need it to calculate
people were then the cross-sectional
placed on opposite area of the river at
sides of the river that location to then
channel, extending be used to calculate
the tape measure the river discharge:
across the channel cross-sectional area
perpendicular to the x velocity. When
flow of the river. repeated across the
They then lowered course of the river,
the taut tape we can collate and
measure until it compare the results
hovers above or to the Bradshaw
barely skims the Model as to whether
water’s surface. We the width of the
then took our channel does
readings from the increase further
tape measure and downstream.
recorded it
Depth Every 30cm across We allocated one We need to
the channel at each person to conduct measure this
site this process. The variable because we
person, starting at need it to calculate
one end of the the cross-sectional
channel, walks 30cm area of the river at
towards the centre that location to then
of the river channel, be used to calculate
perpendicular to the the river discharge:
flow of the river. cross-sectional area
The ruler is then x velocity. When
placed into the river repeated across the
as far down as it course of the river,
goes at that location we can collate and
with its longest edge compare the results
positioned vertically to the Bradshaw
and its second Model to test

7
 longest edge whether the depth
positioned in of the river does
parallel to the flow increase further
of the river. The downstream you go.
person holding the
ruler must not be
blocking the flow of
the river where it
hits the ruler.
Velocity An average of 9 Two people from We need to
readings at each site the group need to measure velocity to
stand ¼ of the way see the changes in
into the centre of velocity as you go
the river channel. downstream as well
They hold 5 metres as use it in the
worth of tape calculation for
measure parallel to discharge. This can
the flow of the river. then be compared
Then a third person to the Bradshaw
drops a ping-pong Model to see if the
ball from the upper discharge increases
end of the tape. downstream.
Once dropped, a
timer is started and
stopped when the
ball reaches the
other end of the
tape. The people
involved in this
practical should not
disrupt the flow of
the river where the
ball is flowing. The
distance is then
divided by the time
to find the velocity.
Repeat for each
quarter of the way
through the river
channel.
Pebble size 10 randomly A delegated person These variables
sampled pebbles at is chosen to select need to be
each site 10 random rocks measured to
which are then compare how the
measured using a average size of the
ruler across river load changes
allocated x, y and z when going down

8
 axes, with x being the river and to then
the longest axes and see if the load
z being the shortest. particle size
decreases when
going down the river
as stated by the
Bradshaw Model.

Calculations:
𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 (𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑐𝑠) = 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 (𝑚2) × 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 (𝑚/𝑠)
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ (𝑚) = 𝑠𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ𝑠 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝑚)/𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠
𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 (𝑚2) = 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑙 𝑊𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ (𝑚) × 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑅𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ (𝑚)
𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 (𝑚/𝑠) = 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 (𝑚) / 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑛 (𝑠)

9
 Site 5 Site 6
Data presentation & analysis
0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1 0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1
Data Presentation 1 – Cross sectional area 0.0 0.0
30.0 30.0
60.0 60.0
Site 1 90.0 90.0
120.0 120.0
0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1
150.0 150.0
0.0
180.0 180.0
Site 7
30.0
0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1
60.0
0.0
90.0
30.0
120.0
60.0
150.0
90.0
180.0
120.0
150.0 Site 8
Site 2 180.0
0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1 0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1
0.0 0.0
30.0
30.0
60.0
60.0 90.0
90.0 120.0
120.0 150.0
180.0
150.0
180.0 Site 3 Site 4 Site 10 Site 9

10.8

13.2
14.4
10.8

13.2
14.4
0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1 0 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1

1.2
2.4
3.6
4.8

7.2
8.4
9.6
1.2

3.6
2.4

4.8

7.2
8.4
9.6

12
12

6
0

6
0.0 0.0 0
0
30.0 30.0
30 30
60.0 60.0
60 60
90.0 90.0
90 90
120.0
120.0 120 120
150.0
150.0 180.0 150 150
180.0 180 180

10
Figure 5

Analysis 1 – Cross sectional area

As shown by the positive trend, the further downstream, the higher the average channel
depth becomes. This aligns itself well with the Bradshaw model as the model also states
that there is a linearly positive correlation between channel depth and how far down the
river it is. But the data does not conform itself as comfortably as the Bradshaw model states.
This can be seen by the anomalous results from Sites 4, 6, 7 and 8. Here, it can be seen that
the majority of the skew is located within the middle course of the river. This skew in the
data could be as a result of multiple factors but the most obvious reasons could be the
anthropogenic extraction of water from the river throughout the middle course for
agricultural use. This is evident by the proximity of farmland surrounding the river at these
sites. Therefore, this would lead to a reduction in the natural discharge of the river, reducing
its erosive capability via solution or hydraulic action. The river also may now lack the energy
to carry a higher load also limiting the possibility of abrasion, ultimately justifying the reason
for the unusually shallow channel depth in sites 6, 7 and 8. The abnormally high depth of
site 4 could be due to the artificial rock dam created that absorbs the river’s energy and also
holds back large loads of water. This could both increase erosion of the channel but also
result in some deposition. This then creates a highly uneven river bed which can be shown
by the figure above.

11
 Data Presentation 2 – Velocity

0.18812 m/s

0.37512 m/s
0.58358 m/s
0.49315 m/s

0.32071 m/s

2.65909 m/s

0.37943 m/s

0.89214 m/s

0.66521 m/s

1.73109 m/s

12
Figure 6

Analysis 2 - Velocity

The velocity measurements almost completely agree with the hypothesis. Overall, there is an increase in the
average velocity from site 1 to site 10 with a somewhat of an increasing trend from sites 1 to 5. But sites 6 and
7 can be seen as the clear anomalous results. There is an obvious and drastic 1.2m/s increase in the average
velocity from site 5 to site 6 which can be clearly seen as abnormal by the figure. There is then a steep drop to
an unusually low site 7 velocity. This misaligns itself with the Bradshaw model because the model states that,
the further down the river, the higher the velocity. Therefore, the unusually steep increase in the velocity must
be as a result of anthropogenic factors. Looking back at the flow and surroundings of the river, it can be seen
that the river has been artificially straightened at site 6. This could be to protect the area of housing from
flooding by displacing the water there as quickly as possible to further downstream. This means that the more
efficient channel results in an increase in velocity at the area of straightening, justifying why the velocity at site
6 is abnormally high. This also explains the drastic decrease in velocity at site 7 as all the displaced water then
collects itself at site 7 creating a floodplain. It makes sense to establish a floodplain at site 7 because, the
housing at site 6 is protected, reducing economic and social damage from possible flooding, while also creating
a safe floodplain region at site 7 to help with the agricultural region north of the site.

13
Data Presentation 3 – Discharge

Analysis 3 – to what extent did it agree with the hypothesis?

Data Presentation 4 –

Analysis 4 - to what extent did it agree with the hypothesis?

Remember that there will be anomalies – you need to recognise them and explain them – feel free to use
annotated photos to back your points up

14
Figure 7

Analysis – Discharge

The Bradshaw model states that, the further downstream, the higher the river discharge will be because the
velocity increases from overall reduced friction against the riverbed. The data above shows that on average,
the river does align itself with the Bradshaw model because the sites 9 and 10 have a much higher discharge
than 1, 2 and 3. But there are again clear anomalies with sites 4 to 8. Site 4 has a much higher discharge than
site 3 which is not entirely unusual, but the following sites can then be seen as having lower discharge than 4
which completely misaligns itself with the Bradshaw model. Sites 9 and 10, however, do then realign to the
Bradshaw model which implies that the skew in the data could be due to anthropogenic factors. To begin with,
site 4 contained an artificial rock dam which absorbs majority of the river’s energy which would supposedly
reduce the velocity of the river and hence the discharge. But there would also be a large quantity of water
collected at that site which would increase the discharge and explains the high discharge at that region.
Therefore, it makes sense that site 4 has a higher discharge than sites 5. Apart from site 5 having a lower
discharge than site 4, the discharge data collected is not too unusual. But the following reduced discharge of
site 6 to around 3 cumecs is as a result of the artificial channel straightening conducted at the site to prodect
the housing area around the site. The then even lower discharge of 0.4 cumecs at site 7 can again be justified
by the floodplain created by the channel straightening at site 6. This means that the water often leaves the
river channel and floods the area around it, reducing the average discharge at the site. After site 8, the river
begins to realign itself to the Bradshaw model by increasing discharge downstream again. This is because there
is minimal human intervention at those sites and a tributary refills the main river after site 8.

15
Data Presentation 4 – Load Particle Size

16
Figure 8

Analysis 4 – Load Particle Size

The Bradshaw Model states that the further downstream, the smaller the load particle size will be. As shown
by Figure 8, the trend line has a negative gradient meaning, overall, the River Derwent does conform to the
Bradshaw Model. This is because, as the river load gets carried further, the more time there is for processes
like attrition and abrasion to take place, making the load particles smaller, smoother, and rounder. But, as
seen by the figure, sites 4 and 7 can be labelled as clear anomalies as they are displaced over 100𝑐𝑚3 from the
line of best fit. The most obvious reason for site 4 to have significantly smaller pebbles could have been
because of the man-made rock dam located at the site. This would only allow smaller load particles to travel
through the dam and across to the other side of the river, lowering the average pebble size at that site. The
next anomaly, an abnormally large average at site 7, can be justified by the fact that the site was a floodplain.
Therefore, the rocks collected closest to the river tended to be the largest rocks that the river deposits when it
floods, increasing the average pebble size that that site. Still, apart from the anomalous results, the river does
conform to the Bradshaw Model when it comes to changing particle load.

17
Data Analysis 5 – Spearman’s Correlation Rank for Velocity

The Spearman’s Correlation Coefficient (R) is a test for how strongly a trend is correlated by producing a real
value between -1 and 1 (Leann & Maria J., 2006). If the value is positive then the trend has a positive
correlation and vice versa if negative. The closer the value is to 1 or -1, the stronger the correlation is. The
Bradshaw Model states that the further away from the source, the greater the velocity should be so the type
of result desired is one close to 1.

The results do show a positive correlation as desired but the weakness of said correlation means the river fails
to completely conform to the Bradshaw Model. This most likely came as a result of the skew found
predominantly in the middle course due to human infrastructure interfering with the natural flow of the river.
Figure 9 – Critical Values of Spearman’s Coefficient Rank

18
Figure 9 shows the critical value as 0.455. Since this is greater than Spearman's Rank of 0.288, the conclusion is
that changes in velocity in the River Derwent do not align with the Bradshaw Model.

Conclusion
The hypothesis stated that the River Derwent would conform to the Bradshaw model with only minor
discrepancies caused by human interaction with the river. Conclusively, this hypothesis is slightly incorrect as
the anthropogenic interventions in fact majorly disrupted the alignment of the river to the model as shown by
the major fluctuations in velocity and discharge due to the miniature dam at site 4 and the artificial channel
straightening at site 6. Therefore, the River Derwent does not conform with the Bradshaw model through the
middle course but does so in the upper and lower courses due to the lack of anthropogenic interactions at
those regions.

Evaluation

Problem Impact on results Solution

Although a light ball is This meant that the ping Instead, access to a
necessary to float on the pong ball’s direction of flowmeter would have
surface of the river to movement was less affected provided more accurate
calculate its velocity, the by the river’s flow but results as the velocity
ping pong ball was too light instead the wind direction. measurements would be
to the extent that it was Overall, this impacted the unaffected by the wind.
blown of course by the time it took for the ball to Alternatively, a heavier ball
wind. cross 5 metres making it that still floats on water, like
possibly too quick or too a tennis or basketball, could
slow. have been used to reduce
the impact of wind on the
velocity.
Measuring width and depth This skewed some of the To counter this, flatter or
of the river often was measurement for width and more accessible areas could
challenging due to obstacles depth as the tape may not have been chosen as sites.
or the steep terrain. have remained taut. This
would make the cross-
sectional area calculations
incorrect and anomalous.
Assumptions of the river’s So, the cross-sectional area To fix this, a more
cross-sectional area were calculations were largely mathematical approach
also made in the over-estimated which could have been taken. For
calculations by assuming it skewed discharge example, the cross-sectional
is rectangular and smooth. calculations also. areas could have been
calculated by integrating the
functions of the figures in
Data Presentation 1 to gain
a more accurate result.
Each site was not Therefore, it is inaccurate to The river’s entire length or
distributed at equidistance assume a linear correlation just a chosen section can be
to each other with Sites like as the results could have divided into 10 locations
9 and 10 being extremely been taken at similar

19
 close whereas sites 5 and 6 locations to provide similar evenly distributed along the
were very far away. results. river.

Alternative hypothesis question:

To what extent does the River Derwent conform to the Bradshaw Model in terms of discharge, velocity, load
particle size, and channel depth if the longitudinal study of the river is divided into smaller subsections (upper,
middle, lower course)?

Bibliography

David, D. (2014, April 12). geograph. Retrieved from River Derwent and Bassenthwaite Lake:

https://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/03/93/35/3933592_78feae75.jpg

Environment Agency, Lake District National Park Authority. (1999). Derwentwater Low Water Levels.

Hydrological & Geological Study, 2.

GIS Wiki. (2010, November 17). Bradshaw Model. Retrieved from Gis.com:

www.wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Bradshaw_model

Grace, G., & John, R. (2015, August 22). A Great British Miscellany. Retrieved from River Derwent (Cumbria):

https://www.knowledge.me.uk/areas/lakes/river_derwent.html

Leann, M., & Maria J., S. (2006). Spearman Correlation Coefficients, Differences between. Sequential

Estimation of the Mean in Finite Populations to Steiner's Most Frequent Value, 12.

20