I'm going to start with this small river to the west. So far, we know this much:
| hex | flow | slope |
| 0109 | 156000 | 0.0003 |
| 0110 | 260000 | 0.0007 |
| 0111 | 390000 | 0.0015 |
| 0212 | 468000 | 0.0001 |
None of the slopes dictate a river type for any of these hexes, and there are no terrain types that suggest a river type, so I'll roll randomly from among the possible types (DA, C, E, F, and D), and then determine the width-to-depth ratio and adjust the slope value due to sinuousity for each hex.
| hex | flow | slope | river type | wdr | sinuousity | adjusted slope |
| 0109 | 156000 | 0.0003 | E | 7 | 1.6 | 0.00048 |
| 0110 | 260000 | 0.0007 | D | 60 | 1 | 0.0007 |
| 0111 | 390000 | 0.0015 | DA | 20 | 1 | 0.0015 |
| 0212 | 468000 | 0.0001 | DA | 23 | 1 | 0.0001 |
So, we can see already that this river is going to go from a relatively narrow, deep river to a wider, shallower river and dropping a bunch of sediment. I might have to go back and change this; it doesn't make much sense to drop sediment with the slope increasing. If anything the river should speed up and erode more. For now we'll press forward and run these values through the spreadsheet. Since I didn't work out every possible WDR outcome for the spreadsheet, I've just used the average of the results for WDR 22 and 24 to find the results for WDR 23 in hex 0212. For what it's worth, the only significant difference it made was in the width.
| hex | flow | slope | river type | wdr | sinuousity | adjusted slope | depth | width | velocity |
| 0109 | 156000 | 0.0003 | E | 7 | 1.6 | 0.00019 | 76.9 | 536.7 | 7.6 |
| 0110 | 260000 | 0.0007 | D | 60 | 1 | 0.0007 | 32.2 | 1930.6 | 8.4 |
| 0111 | 390000 | 0.0015 | DA | 20 | 1 | 0.0015 | 49.1 | 981.6 | 16.2 |
| 0212 | 468000 | 0.0001 | DA | 23 | 1 | 0.0001 | 82.9 | 1904.8 | 5.9 |
Looking at these final results, I'm going to go back and switch river types between hexes 0109 and 0110. If the river speeds up, as it does here, there's no way for it to drop its sediment and form a type D stream in hex 0110. Switching the two river types then gives us:
| hex | flow | slope | river type | wdr | sinuousity | adjusted slope | depth | width | velocity |
| 0109 | 156000 | 0.0003 | D | 60 | 1 | 0.0003 | 31.1 | 1868.4 | 5.4 |
| 0110 | 260000 | 0.0007 | E | 7 | 1.6 | 0.00044 | 79.3 | 555.3 | 11.8 |
| 0111 | 390000 | 0.0015 | DA | 20 | 1 | 0.0015 | 49.1 | 981.6 | 16.2 |
| 0212 | 468000 | 0.0001 | DA | 23 | 1 | 0.0001 | 82.9 | 1904.8 | 5.9 |
All right then, moving on, here is the other major river, with its two main tributaries broken out separately as before. At this point, I have two observations: 1) type D rivers show up more often than they should, given the circumstances required for their formation (you should either move them to a better position as I did for the small river above or just reroll the river type if type D comes up in an inappropriate spot); and 2) if you have a river marked on a 20 mile hex map, its probably impassable without a boat or a bridge.
| hex | flow | slope | river type | wdr | sinuousity | adjusted slope | depth | width | velocity | ||
| 0601 | 156000 | 0.0015 | D | 76 | 1 | 0.0015 | 21 | 1601.7 | 9.2 | ||
| 0602 | 390000 | 0.004 | C | 28 | 2.7 | 0.00148 | 43.3 | 1213.7 | 15.1 | ||
| 0603 | 650000 | 0.0003 | C | 20 | 2.1 | 0.00014 | 92.7 | 1854.6 | 7.6 | ||
| 0604 | 962000 | 0.0003 | C | 16 | 3.1 | 0.000097 | 125.2 | 2003.1 | 7.8 | ||
| 0704 | 1170000 | 0.0001 | E | 12 | 2.6 | 0.000038 | 179.2 | 2150.1 | 6.1 | ||
| 0705 | 1326000 | 0.0001 | E | 5 | 1.5 | 0.000067 | 238 | 1190.1 | 9.4 | ||
| 0706 | 1456000 | 0.0007 | E | 9 | 2.1 | 0.00033 | 144.8 | 1303.5 | 15.4 | ||
| 0707 | 1586000 | 0.0007 | C | 14 | 1.7 | 0.00041 | 121.2 | 1697.3 | 15.4 | ||
| 0103 | 312000 | 0.0001 | C | 16 | 3.1 | 0.000032 | 101 | 1616.7 | 3.8 | ||
| 0104 | 416000 | 0.0001 | DA | 23 | 1 | 0.0001 | 79.3 | 1822.5 | 5.8 | ||
| 0105 | 520000 | 0.0001 | DA | 34 | 1 | 0.0001 | 74.3 | 2529.2 | 5.5 | ||
| 0206 | 624000 | 0.0001 | F | 14 | 3.3 | 0.00003 | 139.5 | 1953.4 | 4.6 | ||
| 0306 | 676000 | 0.0003 | F | 22 | 1.9 | 0.00016 | 88.5 | 1947.8 | 7.8 | ||
| 0407 | 832000 | 0.0007 | C | 20 | 2.2 | 0.00032 | 87.1 | 1742.3 | 11 | ||
| 0507 | 884000 | 0.0001 | C | 28 | 2.3 | 0.000043 | 114.3 | 3202.7 | 4.8 | ||
| 0607 | 910000 | 0.0003 | E | 6 | 3.3 | 0.00009 | 181.7 | 1090 | 9.2 | ||
| 0608 | 988000 | 0.0001 | C | 28 | 1.8 | 0.00005 | 115.9 | 3246 | 5.3 | ||
| 0708 | 2730000 | 0.0003 | F | 24 | 1.7 | 0.00018 | 141.5 | 3394.9 | 11.4 | ||
| 0809 | 2860000 | 0.0007 | DA | 33 | 1 | 0.0007 | 99 | 3266 | 17.7 | ||
| 0810 | 3042000 | 0.0015 | F | 22 | 2.8 | 0.00054 | 123.9 | 2725.5 | 18 | ||
| 0811 | 3276000 | 0.0001 | DA | 13 | 1 | 0.0001 | 213.6 | 2770.6 | 11.1 | ||
| 0911 | 3380000 | 0.0007 | C | 14 | 2.6 | 0.00027 | 174.1 | 2437.9 | 15.9 | ||
| 0912 | 3562000 | 0.0015 | DA | 27 | 1 | 0.0015 | 100.5 | 2712.2 | 26.2 |
Well, this is a pretty broad river by the time we get to the lower reaches on this map. Right around a half mile across. This table was made using 50 inches of rain annually in each hex, which is kind of on the high side, apparently. I'll recalculate all this with 30 inches of annual rain and see what difference it makes, leaving the river types and slopes unchanged. But I'll do that in a later post...this one has waited too long as it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment