water

Article
An Improved Flow Direction Algorithm That Considers Mass
Conservation for Sediment Transport Simulations
Hong Wei 1,2,3,4 , Wen Dai 5 , Bo Wang 1, * , Hui Zhu 2,3,4 , Fei Zhao 2,3,4 , Haoyang Jiao 2,3,4 and Penghui Li 6

1 School of Remote Sensing and Geomatics Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and
Technology, Nanjing 210044, China; [email protected]
2 School of Geography, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, China; [email protected] (H.Z.);
[email protected] (F.Z.); [email protected] (H.J.)
3 Key Laboratory of Virtual Geographic Environment, Nanjing Normal University, Ministry of Education,
Nanjing 210023, China
4 Jiangsu Center for Collaborative Innovation in Geographical Information Resource Development and
Application, Nanjing 210023, China
5 School of Geographical Sciences, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology,
Nanjing 210044, China; [email protected]
6 Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The sediment transport process in watersheds is an important research component of

geomorphology and surface dynamics. Previous work has inferred the spatial distribution of the
sediment transport rate (STR) by the flow direction algorithm and measured topographic variation;
however, the simple application of the flow direction algorithm contributes to mass non-conservation
during a simulation. This study designs an improved flow direction algorithm for a sediment
transport process simulation by judging the mass conservation situation in the simulation process.
The specific implementation is to evaluate the existence of negative values for the STR; if they exist,
the negative values of the STR are reset to stop the propagation of the negative values downstream.
Experiments are conducted to improve the classical D8, MFD–se, and MFD–md flow algorithms in
this paper, and the experimental results show that the method in this paper can effectively improve
the simulation effect of STR. The STR simulations of the three models, D8, MFD–se, and MFD–md,
Citation: Wei, H.; Dai, W.; Wang, B.; improved by 1.26%, 4.17%, and 4.54%, respectively. Moreover, the MFD–se model is more suitable
Zhu, H.; Zhao, F.; Jiao, H.; Li, P. An for the simulation of the STR when comparing the three models. The improved flow algorithm can
Improved Flow Direction Algorithm be used to simulate the STR, sediment content, and pollutant migration in watersheds, providing a
That Considers Mass Conservation new method for the fine-grained characterization of surface processes in watersheds.
for Sediment Transport Simulations.
Water 2023, 15, 4111. https:// Keywords: flow direction algorithm; sediment transport rate; multiple flow direction; DEM
doi.org/10.3390/w15234111

Academic Editor: Dirk de Boer

Received: 17 October 2023 1. Introduction

Revised: 11 November 2023
Water transportation during surface material transport affects the transport of soil,
Accepted: 25 November 2023
Published: 27 November 2023
nutrients, and pollutants [1], leading to decreased land fertility and the pollution of agri-
cultural products, further affecting the regional ecological environment [2,3]. Accordingly,
the simulation and analysis of water flow processes have received widespread attention
in terms of theoretical research and practical applications [4–7]. The automatic extraction
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. of the flow direction from the digital elevation model (DEM) is one of the most critical
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. methods for simulating water flow, which relies heavily on flow direction algorithms [8–10].
This article is an open access article Flow direction algorithms define the direction of runoff and the flow distribution at each
distributed under the terms and point on the ground, which directly determine the path of the sediment transport process
conditions of the Creative Commons and the amount of material transferred [11]. Thus, the investigation of flow algorithms has
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
been one of the research hotspots in practical applications, such as soil erosion, soil and
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
water conservation, and the water–sand process simulation [12,13].
4.0/).

Water 2023, 15, 4111. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15234111 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2023, 15, 4111 2 of 19

Current flow direction algorithms can be classified into single flow direction algorithms
(SFDs), multiple flow direction algorithms (MFDs), and hybrid flow direction algorithms
(HFDs) [14,15]. Under the SFD model, the water flow in a central cell is assumed to flow
out of the central cell from only one direction, followed by a judgment of the flow direction
based on the elevation, enabling each cell to flow to, at most, one downstream cell [16,17].
D8 is the earliest classical SFD algorithm, also known as the maximum slope-drop method,
where the water flow direction is judged by the slope-drop value between the central cell
element and the adjacent cell elements [18]. In the D8 algorithm, all flows in the central cell
always flow in the direction with the highest slope-drop value among the eight directions,
resulting in a unique downstream flow cell for each central cell and at least one upstream
flow cell. The SFD algorithm is suitable for simulating the confluence mechanism of water
flow and can extract an effective river network in a gully area. Yet, it fails to represent the
diffuse flow on the slope in the natural environment due to its single flow direction. The
SFD algorithm tends to produce pseudo-parallel flow paths in the flat region, introducing
an uncertainty factor to the subsequent hydrological analysis. Hence, the MFD algorithm
was proposed. In the MFD algorithm, water flows down any slope with a surface slope
greater than 0, and the water flows are weighted according to the slope-drop values between
the central cell element and the eight adjacent cell elements [19]. MFD algorithms include
the FRho8 [20], MFD [21], and Dinf algorithms [6,22], with the MFD algorithm being the
most classical. The MFD algorithm effectively solves the problem of pseudo-parallel flow
paths and is suitable for simulating surface diffuse flow processes in a flat topography.
The MFD algorithm performs better than the SFD algorithm when simulating water flow
processes on a flat surface with a mild slope. Although the MFD algorithm considers
the dispersion of the water flow and the continuity of the flow direction, it has certain
limitations. In some real surface runoff scenarios, runoff in areas with large slopes usually
converges and shows a unidirectional flow, and in these areas, the SFD algorithm can better
simulate water flow. Moreover, the MFD algorithm is usually more time-consuming than
the SFD algorithm. Consequently, the HFD algorithm was applied and developed. The
HFD algorithm determines the applicable flow algorithm based on the topographic features,
thus combining the advantages of the MFD algorithm and avoiding some of the problems
associated with the undifferentiated application of the SFD algorithm [14]. The HFD can
simulate more accurate water flow and distribution behaviors under different topographic
conditions and is gradually gaining popularity among researchers. Yet, implementing the
HFD algorithm requires a prejudgment of the terrain, which requires a manual intervention
and low automation.
Since the flow direction and flow rate of water are an essential basis for sediment
migration, the simulation method of the sediment transport process based on the flow
direction algorithm was proposed by previous researchers [23–25]. The method links topo-
graphic changes and sediment transport to simulate sediment transport. However, in the
simulation of the sediment transport process, there are negative values due to topographic
changes (erosion is positive to produce sediment; deposition is negative to deposit sedi-
ment), and if the flow direction algorithm is improper, the negative topographic changes
are converted into a negative sediment transport rate (STR) and propagate downstream.
A negative STR violates physical laws since it is impossible for the STR to be negative in
natural scenarios. This indicates that the existing flow algorithm for the sediment transport
process simulation still has serious limitations.
Both single- and multi-flow algorithms only consider the effect of topographic factors
on the water distribution process. The lack of consideration of other factors, such as
the physical processes of runoff, results in the geographic simulation using these flow
algorithms that violate objective laws. Specifically, the underestimation of the STR can
easily occur owing to the negative values generated by single- or multiple-flow algorithms
in modeling the sediment transport transfer process. Therefore, there is an urgent need to
improve the current flow algorithm accordingly by incorporating the physical processes of
runoff. This paper aims to improve the current flow algorithm to obtain more reasonable
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 19

Water 2023, 15, 4111 3 of 19

reasonable sediment transport simulation results. In the process of simulating sediment

transport, the STR of the current cell element is judged in real time to eliminate the nega-
sediment
tive values transport simulation
in the process results.
of sediment In the process
transport of simulating
and improve sedimentand
the performance transport,
accu-
the STR
racy offlow
of the the current cell element is judged in real time to eliminate the negative values
algorithm.
in the process of sediment transport and improve the performance and accuracy of the
2.flow algorithm.
Materials and Methods
The presence
2. Materials of negative values of the DOD (differences of the DEM) is reasonable
and Methods
in real terrain changes due to surface erosion. However, the STR reflects the speed of sur-
The presence of negative values of the DOD (differences of the DEM) is reasonable
face sediment transport, and negative values have no meaning. The current generic flow
in real terrain changes due to surface erosion. However, the STR reflects the speed of
algorithms obviously fail to realize this point. To obtain a more reasonable spatial distri-
surface sediment transport, and negative values have no meaning. The current generic
bution of the STR, the generation of negative STR values should be monitored in real time
flow algorithms obviously fail to realize this point. To obtain a more reasonable spatial
during the simulation and corrected in a timely manner once negative STR values are
distribution of the STR, the generation of negative STR values should be monitored in real
achieved. This idea led to the derivation of an improved flow direction algorithm for the
time during the simulation and corrected in a timely manner once negative STR values are
simulation of sediment transport processes. This method consisted of two main steps: the
achieved. This idea led to the derivation of an improved flow direction algorithm for the
first was to obtain the topographic change volume by subtracting two successive adjacent
simulation of sediment transport processes. This method consisted of two main steps: the
DEMs;
first wasthetosecond wastopographic
obtain the to simulate change
the sediment
volumetransport process
by subtracting using
two the flow
successive algo-
adjacent
rithm
DEMs; combined
the second with
wasthe mass conservation
to simulate the sedimentprinciple.
transportInprocess
the simulation
using theprocess, a real-
flow algorithm
time judgment was made to determine whether the sediment flux met
combined with the mass conservation principle. In the simulation process, a real-time the principle of
mass conservation; if not, the sediment flux was corrected in time and,
judgment was made to determine whether the sediment flux met the principle of mass finally, the distri-
bution of the STR
conservation; in space
if not, was obtained.
the sediment flux was The overall in
corrected workflow
time and,offinally,
the method is shown inof
the distribution
Figure
the STR 1. in space was obtained. The overall workflow of the method is shown in Figure 1.

Workflowmap.
Figure1.1.Workflow
Figure map.

2.1. Algorithm Design

2.1. Algorithm Design
(1) Simulation of the sediment transport process based on the SFD algorithm
(1) Simulation of the sediment transport process based on the SFD algorithm
Inthe
In theSFDSFDalgorithm,
algorithm,thetheflow
flowininthe
thecentral
centralcellcelland
andthe
thereceived
receivedupstream
upstreamflow flowonly
only
went to an adjacent downstream cell, which was determined by
went to an adjacent downstream cell, which was determined by a specific algorithm. The a specific algorithm. The
D8D8algorithm,
algorithm,alsoalsoknown
knownas asthe
themaximum
maximumslope slopedescent
descentalgorithm,
algorithm,isisthe themost
mostwidely
widely
used SFD algorithm, with the flow mode flowing from the central
used SFD algorithm, with the flow mode flowing from the central cell to the neighboring cell to the neighboring
cellwith
cell withthe thegreatest
greatestslope
slopedescent
descentamong
amongthe theeight
eightadjacent
adjacentcells,
cells,which
whichcan canbe beexpressed
expressed
as follows [26]:
as follows [26]:
max {( Zi − Zk )/d}; k = 1, 2, . . . , 8 (1)
𝑚𝑎𝑥{(𝑍𝑖 − 𝑍𝑘 )/𝑑}; 𝑘 = 1,2, … ,8 (1)
where Zi is the elevation of the central cell i and Zk is the elevation of its adjacent cell k; d is
where
the cellZdistance,
i is the elevation
which isofdefined
the central cell the
as when i and Zk is thecell
adjoining elevation of itsinadjacent
k is located cell k; or
the east–west d
isnorth–south
the cell distance, which
directions ofisthe
defined
centralascell
wheni, d the adjoining
is equal√ to the cell
cellk is located
size; when in the
the east–west
adjacent cell
or north–south
k is located in thedirections
diagonal ofdirection,
the central cell
d is i, d istoequal
equal to thethe
2 times cell size;
cell when the adjacent
size.
When previous works used the D8 algorithm for the STR
cell k is located in the diagonal direction, d is equal to √2 times the cell size.simulation, it was considered
that the downstream cell in the direction of the greatest decline in the slope would receive
all the sediment from the upstream cell, ignoring the possibility of negative sediment (STR)
Water 2023, 15, 4111 4 of 19

values during propagation. Hence, the model is modified to judge in a real-time mode
whether its STR is negative, and if it is negative, the STR is set to 0 to avoid the propagation
of negative values. (
k [ Qs + ρ(1 − p)∆Vi ]/t, Qs > 0
Qb = (2)
0 , Qs ≤ 0

where Qkb is the STR of the central cell i in the direction of the maximum slope drop; Qs
is the amount of sediment transported from the upstream cell to the central cell i; p is the
porosity; ρ is the material density; in practical applications, ρ(1 − p) corresponds to the soil
bulk weight; ∆Vi is the volume change at i; and t is the time interval.
(2) Simulation of the sediment transport process based on the MFD algorithm
The D8 SFD algorithm simulates the conveyance path of water from a holistic per-
spective. From the confluence point, the water flows downstream according to the flow
direction until it reaches the outlet and leaves the watershed. However, in plain areas, it is
difficult to determine the direction of the maximum slope drop due to the flat terrain, and
the simulated flow paths are unreasonable, resulting in many parallel river networks [27,28].
In reality, the water flow in one cell mostly flows to multiple downstream cells. Based
on this premise, the MFD algorithm was proposed. Among them, the most widely used
are the slope exponent MFD algorithm (MFD–se) and the maximum downhill slope MFD
algorithm (MFD–md).
In the MFD–se algorithm, the water can flow to any adjacent downstream cell, and
the amount of water assigned is determined by an exponential function of the slope,
which is [21]:
tan Sk α × Lk
dk = 8 ; k = 1, 2, . . . , 8 (3)
∑1 tan Sk α × Lk
where k is the ordinal number of the eight adjacent cells to the central cell i; dk is the
assignment of water flow from the central cell i to the kth neighboring cell; tan Sk is the
slope; α is the index controlling the flow dispersion or concentration; when α is 1, the
algorithm is the MFD, and when it is infinite, the algorithm is equivalent to the SFD; Lk
√ length weighting factor of the kth neighboring cell, which is defined as 0,
is the contour
1/2, and 2/4 when the kth neighboring cell is above the central cell, below the central
cell, and located in the horizontal or vertical directions, and below the central cell with a
diagonal direction, respectively.
Combined with Equation (3), the model is modified to judge in a real-time mode
whether its STR is negative, and if it is negative, the STR is set to 0 to avoid the propagation
of negative values. The improved equation is as follows:

 tan Sk × Lk × [ Qs + ρ(1 − p)∆Vi ] , Qs > 0

 α

8
Qkb = ∑1 tan Sk α × Lk t (4)

0 , Qs ≤ 0


where Qkb is the STR of any cell i to its neighboring direction k, Qs is the amount of
sediment transported from surrounding cells to the current central cell, and ρ(1 − p) is the
soil capacitance.
The principle of the MFD–md algorithm is similar to MFD–se, but the level of flow
assignment differs. In the MFD–md, the maximum downslope gradient is selected as the
topographic feature e to establish the flow assignment function f (e) instead of the index
α that controls the dispersion or concentration of flow in the MFD–se equation, which is
given by [29]:

tan Sk f (e) × Lk e − emin

dk = 8
, f (e) = × (10 − 1.1) + 1.1 (5)
∑1 tan Sk f ( e ) × Lk emax − emin
Water 2023, 15, 4111 5 of 19

where e is the maximum downslope gradient, emin and emax are the minimum and maximum
values of e in the region, respectively.
Combining Equation (5) and continuing to improve Equation (4), the final formula for
calculating the STR is obtained as follows:

tan Sk f (e) × Lk
(
× [ Qs + ρ(1 − p)∆Vi ]/t, Qs > 0
Qkb = ∑81 tan Sk f (e) × Lk (6)
0 , Qs ≤ 0

Equations (2), (4), and (6) require the slope, so the first period of the DEM is used to
calculate the slope. Additionally, the boundary sediment flux Qs is needed to calculate
the STR using the abovementioned three equations. If the boundary Qs is unknown, the
STR of the small watershed is calculated as the relative STR; if the boundary Qs is known,
the absolute STR can be calculated. The sediment flux at the boundary is zero, so all three
equations can be used to calculate the absolute STR in the small watershed.

2.2. Evaluation of Model Performance

The simulation of the sediment transport process using the current flow direction
algorithm possibly leads to a negative STR, contrary to the principle of mass conserva-
tion [30]. Moreover, negative STR values will keep spreading to the downstream area,
causing extensive areas with negative STR values. With the proposed improved flow
direction algorithm, no negative values exist in the simulation results. The evaluation
method of model performance by the proportion of the negative area used in previous
studies is not applicable to this paper [31,32]. Thus, the ratio of the positive STR area to the
whole sample area (P) can be used to evaluate the effect of the flow direction algorithm,
and the formula is:
P = A positive /Awatershed
where Apositive denotes the area of the region with positive STR values, Awatershed is the
watershed area.

2.3. Experimental Sample Area and Data

This paper used an indoor simulated small watershed as the study area, and its
basic morphological characteristics are shown in Table 1. The experimental simulation
in the study area was performed by the State Key Laboratory of Soil Erosion and Dry-
land Agriculture on the Loess Plateau [33]. The small watershed was composed of soil
fill, compacted every 5 cm so that the soil capacity of each layer ranged from 1.36 to
1.4 g/cm3 , with an average soil capacity of 1.39 g/cm3 , where the median soil particle size
was 0.005 mm.

Table 1. Basic properties of the simulated small watershed.

Height Longitudinal Soil Bulk

Aera Length Max Width Perimeter Mean Slope
Difference Gradient Density
31.49 m2 9.1 m 5.8 m 23.3 m 2.57 m 28.24% 15◦ 1.39 g/cm3

The topography of the filled, indoor, small watershed was simulated for surfaces that
were not eroded into gullies by rainfall. The simulated rainfall equipment and the simu-
lated small watershed are shown in Figure 2. In the simulation experiment, 25 simulated
rainfall events were conducted over 2.5 months after the simulated small watershed was
constructed. The designed rainfall intensities were 0.5, 1, and 2 mm/min, representing
small, medium, and heavy rainfall intensities in the Loess Plateau, which accounted for
44%, 36%, and 20% of the designed rainfall events, respectively. The different rainfall
intensities were designed to simulate rainfall characteristics in realistic environments. The
related runoff data were obtained during each rainfall event using a flow collection pond
to calculate the rainfall volume at the watershed outfall. Additionally, the sediment in the
 Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19

Water 2023, 15, 4111 intensities were designed to simulate rainfall characteristics in realistic environments. 6 ofThe
19
related runoff data were obtained during each rainfall event using a flow collection pond
to calculate the rainfall volume at the watershed outfall. Additionally, the sediment in the
flowcollection
flow collectionpond
pondwas
wassampled,
sampled,dried,
dried,and
andweighed
weighedduring
duringeach
eachrainfall
rainfallevent,
event,and
andthe
the
average STR was calculated for each rainfall event. The hydrological monitoring
average STR was calculated for each rainfall event. The hydrological monitoring data, such data,
such
as the as the average
average rainfall
rainfall intensity,
intensity, cumulative
cumulative rainfall
rainfall duration,
duration, and average
and average STR
STR for eachfor
each topographic measurement period, are shown
topographic measurement period, are shown in Table 2. in Table 2.

Figure2.2. Photographs
Figure Photographs of
of the
theexperimental
experimentalenvironment:
environment:(a)(a)simulated rainfall
simulated equipment
rainfall andand
equipment (b)
simulated small watershed.
(b) simulated small watershed.

Table2.2.Monitored
Table Monitoreddata
dataofofsimulated
simulatedsmall
smallwatershed.
watershed.

Rainfall
Rainfall
Rainfall
RainfallRainfall Intensity
Rainfall Intensity Rainfall Level Mean
Rainfall Level STRatatthe
Mean STR the
Period
Period Duration
Duration
Number
Number (mm/min)
(mm/min) (mm)
(mm) Outlet (kg/min)
Outlet (kg/min)
(min)
(min)
11 0.540.54 90.5
90.5 48.87
48.87 1.86
1.86
2 2 0.520.52 89.5
89.5 46.54
46.54 1.11
1.11
DEM1
DEM1 33 0.490.49 89.5
89.5 43.86
43.86 1.73
1.73
4 1.18 47.52 56.07 5.11
45 1.181.21 47.52
45.86 56.07
55.49 5.11
14.07
5 1.21 45.86 55.49 14.07
6 2.41 30.53 73.58 26.12
DEM2 67 2.411.19 30.53 73.58 26.12
DEM2 46.17 54.94 13.88
7 1.19 46.17 54.94 13.88
8 0.57 90.18 51.40 7.52
DEM3 89 0.570.59 90.18 51.40 7.52
DEM3 61.95 36.55 7.81
9 0.59 61.95 36.55 7.81
10 1.20 47.92 57.50 17.82
DEM4 1011 1.202.15 47.92 57.50 17.82
31.17 67.02 35.97
DEM4
1112 2.150.52 31.17
62.94 67.02
32.73 35.97
5.23
DEM5 12 13 0.520.58 62.94
61.53 32.73
35.69 5.23
6.02
DEM5 1314 0.580.56 60.83
61.53 34.06
35.69 4.26
6.02
1415 0.561.12 60.83
46.82 34.06
52.44 4.26
10.98
15 16 1.121.08 45.83
46.82 49.50
52.44 9.63
10.98
DEM6
1617 1.080.98 47.02
45.83 46.08
49.50 7.97
9.63
DEM6 18 1.04 45.37 47.18 6.45
17 0.98 47.02 46.08 7.97
19 2.12 30.37 64.38 16.73
DEM7 18 1.04 45.37 47.18 6.45
20 1.98 34.35 68.01 13.70
19 2.12 30.37 64.38 16.73
DEM7 21 0.53 91.27 48.37 3.01
20 1.98 34.35 68.01 13.70
DEM8 22 0.55 90.60 49.83 2.58
2123 0.530.60 91.27
89.72 48.37
53.83 3.01
2.83
DEM8 2224 0.551.05 90.60
61.35
49.83
–
2.58
–
DEM9 2325 0.602.03 89.72 53.83 2.83
31.65 – –
24 1.05 61.35 – –
DEM9
25 2.03 31.65 – –
Throughout the simulation process, 9 topographic measurements were completed
using digital photogrammetry after rainfall events 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 18, 20, 23, and 25, respec-
tively, and 9 periods of DEM data were obtained with a resolution of 10 mm (Figure 3).
The JPL Carl Zeiss SMK 120 stereo photogrammetry camera was used, and the JX–4 digital
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19

Throughout the simulation process, 9 topographic measurements were completed

Water 2023, 15, 4111 using digital photogrammetry after rainfall events 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 18, 20, 23, and 25, respec- 7 of 19
tively, and 9 periods of DEM data were obtained with a resolution of 10 mm (Figure 3).
The JPL Carl Zeiss SMK 120 stereo photogrammetry camera was used, and the JX–4 digital
photogrammetric workstation from the Beijing Geo-vision information technology com-
photogrammetric workstation from the Beijing Geo-vision information technology com-
pany was employed to generate the nine-period DEM data. The quality of the DEM was
pany was employed to generate the nine-period DEM data. The quality of the DEM was
evaluated using 20 independent checkpoints, and it was calculated that the medium error
evaluated using 20 independent checkpoints, and it was calculated that the medium error
in elevation was less than 2 mm for each period of the DEM. Specifically, the vertical mean
in elevation was less than 2 mm for each period of the DEM. Specifically, the vertical mean
errors of
errors ofthe
theDEM
DEMdatadatafor
foreach
eachperiod
periodranged
rangedfromfrom−−0.09 to 0.28
0.09 to 0.28 mm,
mm, andand the
the standard
standard
deviation ranged from ±1.64 to −1.98 mm. It should be noted that, in the
deviation ranged from ±1.64 to −1.98 mm. It should be noted that, in the subsequent subsequent anal-
ysis, the collection errors of the nine-period DEM data were negligible. Since
analysis, the collection errors of the nine-period DEM data were negligible. Since topo- topographic
changeschanges
graphic were significant over different
were significant periods periods
over different employing the DEM,
employing thethe number
DEM, of topo-
the number
of topographic changes was on the level of centimeters, and the data collection errorsim-
graphic changes was on the level of centimeters, and the data collection error for the for
ulated
the small watershed
simulated was very
small watershed waslow (2 low
very mm), (2 much lower lower
mm), much than thethanlevel
the of theoftopo-
level the
graphic change.
topographic change.

Figure3.3. Nine-period
Figure Nine-periodtopographic
topographicdata
datafor
forthe
thesimulated
simulatedsmall
smallwatershed
watershed[23].
[23].

To
Toanalyze
analyzethe
theconnection
connectionbetween
betweenthe thetopographic
topographicchanges
changesand
andrainfall
rainfalldata,
data, runoff
runoff
data,
data,etc.,
etc., hydrological
hydrologicalmonitoring
monitoringdata,
data,such
such as
as the
the average
average rainfall
rainfall intensity,
intensity,cumulative
cumulative
rainfall
rainfallduration,
duration,and
andaverage STR
average for for
STR eacheach
topographic
topographicmeasurement
measurementperiod, were required
period, were re-
to be calculated,
quired and the and
to be calculated, results
theare shown
results arein Table in
shown 2. Table 2.

3.
3. Results
Results
3.1. Analysis of the Improvement Effect of the SFD Algorithm
3.1. Analysis of the Improvement Effect of the SFD Algorithm
The simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on the D8 SFD model
The simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on the D8 SFD model
are shown in Figure 4, where the rainbow-colored bands from red to blue represent the
are shown in Figure 4, where the rainbow-colored bands from red to blue represent the
magnitude of the STR. The grid scale used for showing the simulated results in the figure
magnitude of the STR. The grid scale used for showing the simulated results in the figure
is 100 cm × 100 cm to present information on the length and width of the simulated
is 100 cm × 100 cm to present information on the length and width of the simulated small
small watershed and the relative spatial location of the STR in the watershed. In the
watershed
SFD and the
algorithm, relative spatial
the sediment location
in a grid of theonly
cell could STRflow
in the
to,watershed. In grid
at most, one the SFD
cell,algo-
and
rithm, the sediment in a grid cell could only flow to, at most, one grid
the sediment transport direction was easily concentrated in one order, thus forming a cell, and the sedi-
ment transport
parallel direction
river network wasEspecially
effect. easily concentrated
in the firstin one periods,
three order, thus forming
because a parallel
the gullies in
the study area were not developed, the direction of the maximum elevation dropthe
river network effect. Especially in the first three periods, because the gullies in study
between
area were not
neighboring griddeveloped, the direction
cells was basically the same. of Hence,
the maximum
the sedimentelevation drop
transport between
paths were
straight or nearly straight lines. With the development of gullies, this parallel river network
effect diminishes, as in periods 7 and 8. Moreover, it can be observed that, before the
improvement of the D8 algorithm, there are relatively many areas with negative STR values
in the simulated watershed.
 neighboring grid cells was basically the same. Hence, the sediment transport paths were
straight or nearly straight lines. With the development of gullies, this parallel river net-
work effect diminishes, as in periods 7 and 8. Moreover, it can be observed that, before the
Water 2023, 15, 4111 8 of 19
improvement of the D8 algorithm, there are relatively many areas with negative STR val-
ues in the simulated watershed.

Figure 4. Results of the STR

Figure STR based
based on
on the
the D8
D8SFD
SFDalgorithm.
algorithm.

The negative values

values entirely
entirely disappear
disappearin inthe
theimproved
improvedD8 D8SFD
SFDalgorithm
algorithmresults
results
(Figure 5). The indicators in the simulation results of the STR before
(Figure 5). The indicators in the simulation results of the STR before and after the improve-and after the im-
provement are shown in Table 3. As can be seen, after the improvement,
ment are shown in Table 3. As can be seen, after the improvement, the maximum, mean, the maximum,
mean, and median
and median values increase
values increase due to thedueincrease
to the increase in the positive
in the positive valueand
value region, region, and
the rise
the riseproportion
in the in the proportion of the positive
of the positive valueranges
value region region from
ranges fromto0.00%
0.00% 2.59%,towith
2.59%, with a
a mean
mean
value value of 1.26%.
of 1.26%. The improvement
The improvement in thein the proportion
proportion of positive
of positive regions
regions reflects
reflects the en-the
enhanced performance
hanced performance of of
thethe improved
improved D8D8 algorithm.
algorithm. It It
is is also
also clear
clear fromTable
from Table3 3that
thatthe
the
improved
improved D8 D8 algorithm
algorithmdoes doesnot notmodify
modify allall
thethe negative
negative areas
areas of the
of the results
results simulated
simulated by
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEWby
thethe unimproved
unimproved D8 algorithm
D8 algorithm to positive
to positive regions,regions,
and someandofsome
themofarethem are 0.9 There-
0. Therefore, offor
19
fore, for the D8 algorithm, the improvement has some optimizations,
the D8 algorithm, the improvement has some optimizations, but there are still some limi- but there are still
some limitations.
tations.

Table 3. Statistical information of each period before and after the D8 algorithm improvement.

Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6 Period 7 Period 8

Max 7470.44 8397.05 35,344.23 44,611.56 10,894.10 22,376.86 18,787.41 26,478.01
Min 15.00 14.32 74.02 96.99 31.03 52.28 41.26 60.29
D8 Mean 0.25 0.22 0.87 1.22 0.15 0.40 0.48 0.54
PPA 33.60% 33.51% 35.66% 37.10% 25.44% 38.49% 35.72% 40.77%
PNA 0.00% 1.00% 4.48% 1.49% 10.93% 5.71% 8.29% 7.86%
Max 7470.44 8471.36 37,217.53 44,816.52 12,479.17 22,969.26 20,806.58 28,824.86
Min 15.00 14.79 84.43 99.86 45.57 58.42 52.90 72.67
Improved
Mean 0.25 0.23 1.13 1.31 0.42 0.53 0.71 0.76
D8
PPA 33.60% 33.83% 36.37% 37.57% 27.43% 40.19% 38.31% 43.05%
PNA 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Note: PPA: percentage of positive area; PNA: percentage of negative area.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Results
Results of
of the
the STR
STR based
basedon
onthe
theimproved
improvedD8
D8SFD
SFDalgorithm.
algorithm.

The results of the improved D8 algorithm subtracted from the before-improved re-
sults show very few negative regions in the comparison results (Figure 6), and only posi-
tive areas appear to be present. This indicates that the improved D8 algorithm signifi-
cantly improves the negative regions. It can be found that the areas with significant im-
provements are located in the downstream and centerline areas of the gully and part of
the gully sidewall. The presence of more negative areas in the upstream region can be
Water 2023, 15, 4111 9 of 19

Table 3. Statistical information of each period before and after the D8 algorithm improvement.

Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6 Period 7 Period 8

Max 7470.44 8397.05 35,344.23 44,611.56 10,894.10 22,376.86 18,787.41 26,478.01
Min 15.00 14.32 74.02 96.99 31.03 52.28 41.26 60.29
D8 Mean 0.25 0.22 0.87 1.22 0.15 0.40 0.48 0.54
PPA 33.60% 33.51% 35.66% 37.10% 25.44% 38.49% 35.72% 40.77%
PNA 0.00% 1.00% 4.48% 1.49% 10.93% 5.71% 8.29% 7.86%
Max 7470.44 8471.36 37,217.53 44,816.52 12,479.17 22,969.26 20,806.58 28,824.86
Min 15.00 14.79 84.43 99.86 45.57 58.42 52.90 72.67
Improved
Mean 0.25 0.23 1.13 1.31 0.42 0.53 0.71 0.76
D8
PPA 33.60% 33.83% 36.37% 37.57% 27.43% 40.19% 38.31% 43.05%
PNA 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Figure 5. Results
Note: PPA: of the
percentage of STR based
positive onPNA:
area; the improved
percentage D8 SFD algorithm.
of negative area.

The
The results
results of of the improved D8
the improved D8 algorithm
algorithmsubtracted
subtractedfromfromthe
thebefore-improved
before-improvedresults
re-
sults
showshow
very very few negative
few negative regions
regions in thein the comparison
comparison resultsresults
(Figure(Figure
6), and6), andpositive
only only posi-
areas
tive areas appear to be present. This indicates that the improved D8 algorithm
appear to be present. This indicates that the improved D8 algorithm significantly improves signifi-
cantly improves
the negative the negative
regions. It can regions.
be foundIt that
can be
thefound
areas that
withthe areas with
significant significant im-are
improvements
provements are located in the downstream and centerline areas of
located in the downstream and centerline areas of the gully and part of the gully the gully and part of
sidewall.
the gully sidewall. The presence of more negative areas in the upstream
The presence of more negative areas in the upstream region can be observed, and the STR region can be
observed,
accumulates andinthe
the STR accumulates
process in thedownstream.
of propagating process of propagating
Thus, large, downstream.
negative areasThus,
appear
large,
in the downstream region. Additionally, the propagated negative STR ispropagated
negative areas appear in the downstream region. Additionally, the neg- at
heavily accrued
ative STR is heavily
the centerline of theaccrued
gully dueat the centerline
to the fast flowofrate.
the gully due to the fast flow rate.

Figure 6. Comparison of STR results before and after the improvement based on the D8 algorithm.
Figure 6. Comparison of STR results before and after the improvement based on the D8 algorithm.
3.2. Analysis of the Improvement Effect of the MFD Algorithm
3.2.1. Simulation of the Sediment Transport Process Based on the MFD–se Algorithm
The simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on the MFD–se algorithm
are shown in Figure 7, where the rainbow-colored bands from red to blue represent the
magnitude of the STR. It can be observed that there are more areas with negative STRs
in the watershed, especially in the fifth and seventh periods. The MFD algorithm allows
sediment to flow from one grid cell to multiple grid cells downstream. Therefore, the
MFD–se algorithm significantly improves the parallel river network effect of the simulation
results compared to the SFD algorithm. The fact that sediment flow from the grid cells is
 3.2.1. Simulation of the Sediment Transport Process Based on the MFD–se Algorithm
The simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on the MFD–se algo-
rithm are shown in Figure 7, where the rainbow-colored bands from red to blue represent
the magnitude of the STR. It can be observed that there are more areas with negative STRs
in the watershed, especially in the fifth and seventh periods. The MFD algorithm allows
Water 2023, 15, 4111 sediment to flow from one grid cell to multiple grid cells downstream. Therefore, the 10 of 19
MFD–se algorithm significantly improves the parallel river network effect of the simula-
tion results compared to the SFD algorithm. The fact that sediment flow from the grid cells
is no
no longerconcentrated
longer concentrated inin one
one downstream
downstreamgrid gridalso makes
also makesthethe
path concentration
path effecteffect
concentration
of sediment transport less pronounced. As branch gullies develop, the sediment
of sediment transport less pronounced. As branch gullies develop, the sediment remains remains
concentrated in
concentrated inthe
thegullies,
gullies,not
notjust onon
just the centerline,
the butbut
centerline, throughout
throughoutwhole gullies,
whole and and
gullies,
this phenomenon is significantly more factual.
this phenomenon is significantly more factual.

Figure 7.
Figure 7. Results
Resultsofofthe
theSTR
STRbased
basedonon
MFD–se algorithm.
MFD–se algorithm.

Figure
Figure88shows
shows thethe
simulation results
simulation of theofimproved
results MFD–se
the improved algorithm
MFD–se for the STR.
algorithm for the
The improved MFD–se algorithm significantly corrects the occurrence
STR. The improved MFD–se algorithm significantly corrects the occurrence of negative of negative STR
values,
STR with the
values, withnegative regionregion
the negative completely eliminated.
completely The indicators
eliminated. of the results
The indicators of thesim-
results
ulated by the MFD–se algorithm are shown in Table 4. As can be
simulated by the MFD–se algorithm are shown in Table 4. As can be noticed, after noticed, after the im- the
provement of the
improvement MFD–se
of the MFD–se algorithm,
algorithm,the the
maximum,
maximum, mean, and and
mean, median values
median increase
values increase
due to the increase in the positive area, and the increase in the proportion of positive
due to the increase in the positive area, and the increase in the proportion of the the positive
area ranges
area ranges from
from0.00%
0.00%toto10.04%,
10.04%,with
with aamean
mean value
valueof of
4.17%. TheThe
4.17%. improved
improved MFD–se
MFD–se
algorithm does not show negative regions, which significantly affects the
algorithm does not show negative regions, which significantly affects the improvement improvement of
the simulation results, especially in the fifth and seventh periods. The area
of the simulation results, especially in the fifth and seventh periods. The area of the of the negative
region in the
negative results
region of the
in the MFD–se
results algorithm
of the MFD–se foralgorithm
these two periods
for thesereached 10.30% and
two periods reached
8.27%, respectively, representing the two periods with the greatest errors. From the statis-
10.30% and 8.27%, respectively, representing the two periods with the greatest errors. From
tical values of the indicators before and after the improvement, it is evident that the im-
the statistical values of the indicators before and after the improvement, it is evident that
provement of the MFD–se algorithm is noticeable.
the improvement of the MFD–se algorithm is noticeable.

Table 4. Statistical information for each period before and after the MFD–se algorithm improvement.

Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6 Period 7 Period 8

Max 3815.63 7207.58 35,378.31 39,770.87 10,894.10 20,285.19 17,331.12 26,474.16
Min 8.71 9.90 52.61 69.77 21.31 44.09 34.36 50.44
MFD–se Mean 0.04 0.10 0.50 0.63 0.02 0.33 0.36 0.55
PPA 60.36% 52.17% 55.48% 54.75% 45.20% 49.54% 47.41% 55.62%
PNA 0.00% 0.72% 3.08% 1.22% 10.30% 5.51% 8.27% 5.44%
Max 3815.63 7256.98 36,211.57 39,822.40 12,006.44 20,582.70 19,034.43 27,676.04
Min 8.71 10.01 53.96 69.89 23.03 44.82 38.18 52.14
Improved
Mean 0.04 0.11 0.53 0.64 0.05 0.36 0.43 0.58
MFD–se
PPA 60.36% 52.89% 58.09% 55.97% 55.24% 54.89% 55.44% 61.00%
PNA 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
Water 2023,
Water 15, 15,
2023, 4111x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19 11 of 19

Figure 8.8.Results
Figure Resultsofof
thethe
STR based
STR on improved
based MFD–se
on improved algorithm.
MFD–se algorithm.

Table A
4. Statistical
comparison information
of thefor each between
STRs period before
theand after
two the MFD–se
periods wasalgorithm
obtainedimprovement.
by subtracting the
results
Period 1 of the before-improved MFD–se algorithm from the
Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6 Period 7 Period 8 results of the improvement
Max period, 7207.58
3815.63 and it can be seen 39,770.87
35,378.31 that the comparison results are17,331.12
10,894.10 20,285.19 similar to26,474.16
those of the D8
Min algorithm9.90
8.71 (Figure 9).52.61
The presence
69.77of large positive areas
21.31 44.09 in the 34.36
comparison results leads to
50.44
MFD–se Mean the impression
0.04 0.10 that 0.50
no negative values exist,
0.63 0.02 but negative
0.33 areas are indeed
0.36 0.55present; they
PPA are just 52.17%
60.36% fewer in size.
55.48%The areas
54.75%where45.20%
improvements49.54%were 47.41%
more evident 55.62%were located
PNA downstream
0.00% 0.72%and on the centerline
3.08% 1.22%of the10.30%
watershed5.51%
and some8.27%of the watershed
5.44% sidewalls.
Max The continuous
3815.63 7256.98 downward propagation
36,211.57 39,822.40 of the negative
12,006.44 20,582.70 STR results 27,676.04
19,034.43 in many negative
Min STR areas
8.71 in the downstream
10.01 53.96 area, similar
69.89 to the improved
23.03 44.82 results
38.18 of the D8 algorithm.
52.14
Improved
Mean The
0.04 difference
0.11 is that there
0.53 are more
0.64 red areas
0.05 in the comparison
0.36 0.43 results 0.58the MFD–se
of
MFD–se
PPA algorithm,
60.36% which indicates
52.89% 58.09% that the difference
55.97% 55.24% between
54.89%the MFD–se
55.44% algorithm
61.00% before and
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19
PNA after the 0.00%
0.00% improvement 0.00%is more0.00%
remarkable. The improvement
0.00% 0.00% effect is more
0.00% 0.00%evident than
that of the D8 algorithm.
A comparison of the STRs between the two periods was obtained by subtracting the
results of the before-improved MFD–se algorithm from the results of the improvement
period, and it can be seen that the comparison results are similar to those of the D8 algo-
rithm (Figure 9). The presence of large positive areas in the comparison results leads to
the impression that no negative values exist, but negative areas are indeed present; they
are just fewer in size. The areas where improvements were more evident were located
downstream and on the centerline of the watershed and some of the watershed sidewalls.
The continuous downward propagation of the negative STR results in many negative STR
areas in the downstream area, similar to the improved results of the D8 algorithm. The
difference is that there are more red areas in the comparison results of the MFD–se algo-
rithm, which indicates that the difference between the MFD–se algorithm before and after
the improvement is more remarkable. The improvement effect is more evident than that
of the D8 algorithm.

Figure 9.9.Comparison
Figure Comparisonof the STRSTR
of the based on the
based onbefore and after
the before andimprovements of the MFD–se
after improvements of the algorithm.
MFD–se algorithm.

3.2.2. Simulation of the Sediment Transport Process Based on the MFD–md Algorithm
The simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on the MFD–md algo-
rithm are shown in Figure 10, where the rainbow-colored band from red to blue represents
the magnitude of the STR. The results of the MFD–md algorithm are similar to those of
the MFD–se algorithm due to the weighted assignment of flows, and the “parallel river
network” effect and the concentration of sediment transport paths in the D8 algorithm are
Water 2023, 15, 4111 12 of 19

Figure 9. Comparison of the STR based on the before and after improvements of the MFD–se algorithm.

3.2.2. Simulation
3.2.2. Simulationof ofthe
theSediment
SedimentTransport
TransportProcess Based
Process Basedononthethe
MFD–md
MFD–md Algorithm
Algorithm
The simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on
simulation results of the sediment transport paths based on the MFD–md the MFD–md algo-algo-
rithm
rithm are shown in Figure 10, where the rainbow-colored band from red to blue
shown in Figure 10, where the rainbow-colored band from red to blue represents represents
the magnitude
the magnitude of of the
theSTR.
STR.The
Theresults
resultsofofthe
theMFD–md
MFD–md algorithm
algorithm areare
similar to those
similar of of
to those
the MFD–se algorithm due to the weighted assignment of flows, and
the MFD–se algorithm due to the weighted assignment of flows, and the “parallel riverthe “parallel river
network” effect
network” effect and
andthe theconcentration
concentrationofofsediment
sediment transport
transportpaths in the
paths D8 algorithm
in the are are
D8 algorithm
attenuated. Moreover, areas with negative STR values exist, especially the
attenuated. Moreover, areas with negative STR values exist, especially the most obvious most obvious
ones in
ones in the
the fifth
fifth and
andseventh
seventhperiods.
periods.

Figure 10.
Figure 10. Results
Resultsof
ofthe
theSTR
STRbased
basedononthe
theMFD–md
MFD–mdalgorithm.
algorithm.

The negative STR values entirely disappeared in the simulation results of the improved
MFD–md algorithm (Figure 11). The indicators of the results simulated by the MFD–md
algorithm are shown in Table 5. It can be observed that there are no longer any negative
regions in the simulation results of the improved MFD–md algorithm, and the proportion
of positive areas in each period has increased compared to that before the improvement,
corresponding to increases in the maximum, mean, and median values. The increase in the
proportion of positive regions ranges from 0.00% to 10.58%, with a mean value of 4.54%.
After comparing the statistical indicator values of the calculation results of the MFD–se
and MFD–md algorithms, it was found that the negative STR region calculated by the
MFD–se algorithm was smaller than the MFD–md algorithm, indicating that the error of
the MFD–se algorithm was lower and the simulation effect of the STR was better than that
of the MFD–md algorithm.

Table 5. Statistical information for each period before and after the MFD–md algorithm improvement.

Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6 Period 7 Period 8

Max 4740.49 8289.73 35,364.24 39,675.66 10,894.87 22,139.55 16,562.19 26,480.26
Min 8.38 9.44 50.72 68.95 20.62 42.21 32.63 48.03
MFD–md Mean 0.03 0.08 0.41 0.58 0.01 0.27 0.29 0.40
PPA 60.34% 51.71% 54.37% 52.95% 44.21% 49.07% 47.00% 54.44%
PNA 0.00% 0.79% 3.59% 1.33% 10.95% 5.73% 8.62% 6.59%
Max 4740.49 8349.73 36,390.77 39,733.96 12,186.44 22,627.60 18,263.32 28,061.01
Min 8.38 9.54 52.21 69.09 22.57 42.94 36.40 50.19
Improved Mean 0.03 0.08 0.43 0.59 0.03 0.29 0.34 0.42
MFD–md PPA 60.34% 52.51% 57.49% 54.28% 54.78% 54.63% 55.37% 60.98%
PNA 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
 provement, corresponding to increases in the maximum, mean, and median values. The
increase in the proportion of positive regions ranges from 0.00% to 10.58%, with a mean
value of 4.54%. After comparing the statistical indicator values of the calculation results
of the MFD–se and MFD–md algorithms, it was found that the negative STR region calcu-
lated by the MFD–se algorithm was smaller than the MFD–md algorithm, indicating that
Water 2023, 15, 4111 13 of 19
the error of the MFD–se algorithm was lower and the simulation effect of the STR was
better than that of the MFD–md algorithm.

Figure 11.
Figure 11. Results
Results of
of the
the STR
STR based
based on
onthe
theimproved
improvedMFD–md
MFD–mdalgorithm.
algorithm.

3.2.3. Comparison
Table 5. of MFD–se
Statistical information andperiod
for each MFD–mdbeforeAlgorithms
and after the MFD–md algorithm improvement.

PeriodTo 1 compare
Periodthe 2 differences
Period 3 between
Period 4 thePeriod
simulations of STRs
5 Period 6 by the two
Period 7 algorithms,
Period 8
the simulation results of the MFD–se and MFD–md algorithms were subtracted corre-
Max 4740.49 8289.73 35,364.24 39,675.66 10,894.87 22,139.55 16,562.19 26,480.26
spondingly for each period to obtain the difference (Figure 12). The blue area is negative,
Min 8.38 9.44 50.72 68.95 20.62 42.21 32.63 48.03
indicating that the STR in this area in the simulation results of the MFD–se algorithm is
MFD–md Mean 0.03 0.08 0.41 0.58 0.01 0.27 0.29 0.40
lower than that in the simulation results of the MFD–md algorithm; the red area is positive,
PPA 60.34% 51.71% 54.37% 52.95% 44.21% 49.07% 47.00%
indicating that the STR in this area in the simulation results of the MFD–se algorithm is 54.44%
PNA 0.00% than0.79%
higher that in the 3.59%
simulation1.33%results of 10.95%
the MFD–md 5.73% 8.62%
algorithm. 6.59%there
Sensorially,
Max 4740.49 8349.73
are significantly more36,390.77 39,733.96
red than blue areas. 12,186.44
Enlarging 22,627.60 18,263.32
the difference diagram,28,061.01
it can be
Min 8.38
observed that9.54 52.21 results69.09
the simulation 22.57 algorithm
of the MFD–se 42.94are higher
36.40than those
50.19of the
Improved
Mean 0.03
MFD–md in 0.08 0.43sidewall
the part of the 0.59
and gully0.03(except the0.29 0.34
centerline). 0.42at the
In contrast,
MFD–md
PPA 60.34%
centerline of 52.51%
the gully, 57.49% 54.28%
the simulation results54.78%
of the MFD–md54.63%algorithm
55.37%are higher
60.98%than
PNA 0.00%of the 0.00%
those 0.00%
MFD–se algorithm. 0.00%
This indicates0.00% 0.00% distribution
that the sediment 0.00% 0.00%
path of the
MFD–md is more concentrated when simulating the sediment transport paths, so the STR
is higher
3.2.3. at the center
Comparison line of the
of MFD–se andgully and lower
MFD–md at the sidewall and slope of the gully. This
Algorithms
phenomenon is consistent with the flow distribution
To compare the differences between the simulations algorithm
of STRsof by
thethe
MFD–md algorithm.
two algorithms,
In
the simulation results of the MFD–se and MFD–md algorithms were subtracted efficient
practical applications, the MFD–md algorithm is more time-consuming and less corre-
than the MFD–se
spondingly for eachalgorithm.
period toConsequently, the MFD–se
obtain the difference algorithm
(Figure 12). Theisblue
more suitable
area for the
is negative,
simulation of the STR.
indicating that the STR in this area in the simulation results of the MFD–se algorithm is
 those of the MFD–se algorithm. This indicates that the sediment distribution path of the
MFD–md is more concentrated when simulating the sediment transport paths, so the STR
is higher at the center line of the gully and lower at the sidewall and slope of the gully.
This phenomenon is consistent with the flow distribution algorithm of the MFD–md al-
Water 2023, 15, 4111
gorithm. In practical applications, the MFD–md algorithm is more time-consuming and 14 of 19
less efficient than the MFD–se algorithm. Consequently, the MFD–se algorithm is more
suitable for the simulation of the STR.

Figure 12.
12. STR
STRcomparison
comparisonresults
resultsbetween
betweenMFD–se
MFD–seand MFD–md
and algorithms.
MFD–md algorithms.

4. Discussion
4. Discussion
4.1. InfluenceofofDEM
4.1. Influence DEMData
DataSelection
Selection
As the
As the primary
primarydatadataininthethesimulation
simulation of of
thethe sediment
sediment transport
transport process,
process, DEMDEMdata,data,
with
with their
their derived
derived parameters,
parameters, such such asas slope
slope and
and topographic change index,
topographic change index, determine
determine the
effect of the
the effect STRSTR
of the simulation.
simulation. WhenWhen simulating
simulating thethespatial
spatialdistribution
distributionofofthe
theSTR,
STR,the
thefirst-
period
first-period DEM, the second-period DEM, or the mean values of these two DEM periods can
DEM, the second-period DEM, or the mean values of these two DEM periods
be
canselected. To investigate
be selected. the influence
To investigate of DEM
the influence of DEMdata selection on theonsediment
data selection transport
the sediment
process,
transport process, this paper obtained the DEM data of periods 1 and 2 as examples by the
this paper obtained the DEM data of periods 1 and 2 as examples by using
better-performing MFD–se MFD–se
using the better-performing flow direction algorithm
flow direction to simulate
algorithm the spatial
to simulate distribution
the spatial dis- of
the STR. Figure 13 shows the percentage of areas with negative STRs
tribution of the STR. Figure 13 shows the percentage of areas with negative STRs using using different DEMs.
It was found
different DEMs.that, when
It was using
found thewhen
that, first-period
using theDEM of each period,
first-period DEM ofthe proportion
each period, theof the
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEWarea with negative
proportion values
of the area of the STR
with negative was of
values significantly
the STR wassmaller than the
significantly mean
smaller DEM
than of and
15the 19
second-period
mean DEM andDEM, indicatingDEM,
second-period that itindicating
was morethat appropriate
it was moreto use the first-period
appropriate to use DEM
the to
first-period
calculate theDEM to calculateslope
corresponding the corresponding slope andinother
and other parameters parameters
the STR in the STR
simulation.
simulation.

Figure 13. The

The proportion
proportion of
of areas
areaswith
withnegative
negativeSTRs
STRsunder
underdifferent
differentDEM
DEMselections.
selections.

It is worth emphasizing
emphasizing that
thatthe
thetopography
topographychanges
changesgradually
graduallyduring
duringerosion,
erosion,and
and
the sediment
sediment transport
transportpaths
pathsalso
alsocontinuously
continuouslychange.
change.Thus,
Thus,avoiding
avoidinguncertainties inin
uncertainties the
the path assignment calculation is difficult using only the period–1 DEM data. Moreover,
as the topography changes become more evident over time, the uncertainty of the sedi-
ment transport path simulation using only the period–1 DEM increases. Despite the better
performance of using the period–1 DEM in this experiment, using only the period–1 DEM
Water 2023, 15, 4111 15 of 19

path assignment calculation is difficult using only the period–1 DEM data. Moreover, as
the topography changes become more evident over time, the uncertainty of the sediment
transport path simulation using only the period–1 DEM increases. Despite the better
performance of using the period–1 DEM in this experiment, using only the period–1
DEM for the STR simulation is theoretically not recommended. Another scenario worth
discussing is the issue of topographic mutation points. In the process of topography change,
there is probably such a mutation point where the terrain remains stable for a long enough
time after the mutation point. Under this condition, the sediment is transported on this
stable terrain for most of the time, and the sediment transport paths are significantly
different from those under the first-period DEM, which is better with the period–2 DEM
than with the period–1 DEM. In conclusion, the selection of DEM data is based on the
actual topography change characteristics. In different cases, the stage of the topography
change should be evaluated to select the appropriate DEM data.

4.2. Influence of Spatial Resolution of the DEM Data

The scale effect is an inherent property for analyzing geographic issues, especially the
uncertainty of the experimental results caused by data resolution [34,35]. In the proposed
algorithm, the DEM resolution is an essential factor affecting the performance of the method.
In this study, although processing high-resolution (10 mm) DEM data did not present the
problem of an insufficient computer arithmetic, a high DEM resolution may have challenged
the computer processing power when faced with large regional scales or large amounts of
DEM data. In this case, an appropriate DEM resolution needed to be selected to balance
the conflict between the data quality and computer arithmetic. Therefore, it is necessary
to understand the variation of the DOD with a DEM resolution. To explore the effect of
the DEM resolution on the spatial distribution of the STR and topographic changes, this
paper used period–2 and –3 DEMs as examples and resampled the original DEM resolution
(10 mm) to 50, 100, 200, and 500 mm to study the effect of DEM resolution on the DOD.
The DOD was calculated by subtracting the period–2 DEM from the period–3 DEM [36].
Positive values signified material accumulation in the topography and negative values
indicated the surface was eroded and material was lost. The results are shown in Figure 14.
As can be seen, the decrease in the DEM resolution has little effect on the change in the
proportion of negative values in the DOD. Moreover, the maximum value of the DOD
change gradually decreases while the minimum value gradually increases. Meanwhile, the
numerical variability of the DOD gradually decreases and the differentiation of the spatial
distribution of negative values is gradually insignificant. It is evident that the higher the
resolution of the DEM data, the higher the accuracy of the DOD calculation and the more
apparent the topographic change characteristics.
Furthermore, the original resolution (10 mm) was resampled to 50, 100, 200, and
500 mm to observe the effect of the DEM resolution on the simulation of the spatial
distribution of the STR, using the second-period DEM as an example. The experimental
results are shown in Figure 15. As can be observed, with the gradual decrease in the DEM
resolution, the spatial range of sediment transport becomes wider, and some slope areas
without erosion transport are misjudged as having erosion transport, which leads to the
overestimation of the STR in these areas. This suggests that a lower-resolution DEM causes
misclassifications of STRs in areas without sediment transport and underestimates areas
with inherently higher STRs. In addition to this local effect, the overall STR in the sample
area (outlet STR) decreases with the coarser resolution of the DEM. Additionally, the use
of a coarse-resolution DEM may also lead to abrupt changes in the STR in localized areas.
For example, when using a 200 mm-resolution DEM, the STR at 350–400 cm downstream
suddenly decreases extremely quickly. The reason for this phenomenon is that this area is
the narrow gap in the channel (Figure 3), and due to the smoothing effect of a coarser DEM
resolution, this “gap” is smoothed out, causing the sediment to get stuck in this part and
not transported downstream.
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 19

differentiation of the spatial distribution of negative values is gradually insignificant. It is

Water 2023, 15, 4111 16 of 19
evident that the higher the resolution of the DEM data, the higher the accuracy of the DOD
calculation and the more apparent the topographic change characteristics.

Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 19

Figure 14. The

The proportion
proportionof
ofnegative
negativevalues
valuesininthe
theDOD
DODunder
underdifferent
differentDEM
DEMresolutions.
resolutions.

Furthermore, the original resolution (10 mm) was resampled to 50, 100, 200, and 500
mm to observe the effect of the DEM resolution on the simulation of the spatial distribu-
tion of the STR, using the second-period DEM as an example. The experimental results
are shown in Figure 15. As can be observed, with the gradual decrease in the DEM reso-
lution, the spatial range of sediment transport becomes wider, and some slope areas with-
out erosion transport are misjudged as having erosion transport, which leads to the over-
estimation of the STR in these areas. This suggests that a lower-resolution DEM causes
misclassifications of STRs in areas without sediment transport and underestimates areas
with inherently higher STRs. In addition to this local effect, the overall STR in the sample
area (outlet STR) decreases with the coarser resolution of the DEM. Additionally, the use
of a coarse-resolution DEM may also lead to abrupt changes in the STR in localized areas.
For example, when using a 200 mm-resolution DEM, the STR at 350–400 cm downstream
suddenly decreases extremely quickly. The reason for this phenomenon is that this area is
the narrow gap in the channel (Figure 3), and due to the smoothing effect of a coarser
DEM resolution, this “gap” is smoothed out, causing the sediment to get stuck in this part
and not transported downstream.

Figure 15.
Figure 15. Effect
Effect of
of DEM
DEMresolution
resolutionon
onthe
thespatial
spatialdistribution
distributionofofthe
theSTR.
STR.

Summarizing the variation of the STR spatial distribution with the DEM data resolu-
tion, it can be found that the effect of the STR simulation decreases with the quality of the
DEM data, and coarser DEM data expand the sediment transport area and incorrectly cal-
culate the value of the STR.
Water 2023, 15, 4111 17 of 19

Summarizing the variation of the STR spatial distribution with the DEM data reso-
lution, it can be found that the effect of the STR simulation decreases with the quality of
the DEM data, and coarser DEM data expand the sediment transport area and incorrectly
calculate the value of the STR.

4.3. Analysis of the Reasons for a Negative STR

There are three possibilities for achieving a negative STR: one is caused by mass non-
conservation due to measurement errors, the second is caused by incorrect flow direction
algorithms, and the third is caused by anthropogenic disturbances. Suppose that a negative
STR is caused by mass non-conservation due to measurement errors. In this case, it is
theoretically reasonable to avoid this type of effect by assigning zero to the negative STR
in this study. Suppose the flow direction algorithm generates a negative STR. In this case,
this paper improves the flow direction algorithm by zeroing out the negative values, which
somewhat affect the mass conservation. Yet, the overall STR in the negative area is relatively
low (~0.01 kg/min), and the ratio is less than 0.01% compared to the total mass change
(~100 kg). Correspondingly, the improved STR calculation results can be significantly
optimized, with a maximum improvement of 10.95% from an area ratio perspective. It is
considered acceptable to bring about more than a 10% optimization of the STR distribution
area with an impact of less than a 0.01% loss of conservation of mass. The anthropogenic
impacts did not need to be discussed in this paper since the study area was a simulated
small watershed that excluded anthropogenic disturbances.

5. Conclusions
In the simulation of the sediment transport process based on the flow direction algo-
rithm, the unreasonable flow direction algorithm caused the generation and propagation of
negative STRs downstream, seriously affecting the simulation effect of the sediment trans-
port process. This paper designed an improved flow direction algorithm for the sediment
transport process simulation by judging the mass conservation situation in the simulation
process, that is, whether the STR was negative or not, and if there was a negative STR, it was
reset to 0 to stop the propagation of the negative STR downstream. The experimental results
show that the performance of the improved D8 algorithm improves by 1.26% on average
compared with that before the improvement, the performance of the improved MFD–se
algorithm improves by 4.17% on average compared with that before the improvement,
and the performance of the improved MFD–md algorithm improves by 4.54% on average
compared with that before the improvement. Generally, the accuracy of the improved flow
direction algorithms for the STR simulation results was improved, especially for the MFD
algorithm. Meanwhile, comparing the three improved flow direction algorithms, it was
found that the MFD–se algorithm was the most suitable for the simulation of the STR.
It is worth pointing out that we did not target the improvement of the common flow
direction algorithm. Instead, we oriented the improvement of the flow direction algorithm
for specific sediment transport process scenarios, thus providing a more reasonable calcula-
tion of the STR. Consequently, the proposed method can be applied to scenarios related
to sediment transport processes, such as soil erosion control, soil and water conservation
monitoring, and agricultural production management. It can also provide methodological
references for the related research. With the development of UAV photogrammetry, radar
surveying, and other technologies, it is increasingly convenient to obtain high-precision
topographic data. The applicability of the proposed improved flow algorithm on the field
measurement of high-precision topographic data will continue to be explored in future
research. Additionally, in natural basin systems, when anthropogenic factors alter the
topography, there is a lack of conservation of mass, and consequently, a negative STR
occurs. Thus, the negative region of the STR can be considered in subsequent studies to
measure the intensity of anthropogenic surface modifications.
Water 2023, 15, 4111 18 of 19

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.W. and B.W.; data curation and software, H.Z. and
F.Z.; writing—original draft, H.W. and H.J.; writing—review and editing, P.L. and W.D.; funding
acquisition, B.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of the Jiangsu Higher
Education Institutions of China (No. 22KJB170016), the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (Nos. 42301478 and 41971333), and the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu
Higher Education Institutions (164320H116). This paper was supported by the Deep-time Digital
Earth (DDE) Big Science Program.
Data Availability Statement: No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is
not applicable to this article.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank the editors and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful
comments and suggestions, which significantly improved this manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Orlandini, S.; Moretti, G. Determination of Surface Flow Paths from Gridded Elevation Data. Water Resour. Res. 2009, 45, W03417.
[CrossRef]
2. Chorowicz, J.; Ichoku, C.; Riazanoff, S.; Kim, Y.-J.; Cervelle, B. A Combined Algorithm for Automated Drainage Network
Extraction. Water Resour. Res. 1992, 28, 1293–1302. [CrossRef]
3. Shin, S.; Paik, K. An Improved Method for Single Flow Direction Calculation in Grid Digital Elevation Models. Hydrol. Process.
2017, 31, 1650–1661. [CrossRef]
4. Scarpa, G.M.; Braga, F.; Manfè, G.; Lorenzetti, G.; Zaggia, L. Towards an Integrated Observational System to Investigate Sediment
Transport in the Tidal Inlets of the Lagoon of Venice. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 3371. [CrossRef]
5. Han, X.; Liu, J.; Mitra, S.; Li, X.; Srivastava, P.; Guzman, S.M.; Chen, X. Selection of Optimal Scales for Soil Depth Prediction on
Headwater Hillslopes: A Modeling Approach. CATENA 2018, 163, 257–275. [CrossRef]
6. Tarboton, D.G. A New Method for the Determination of Flow Directions and Upslope Areas in Grid Digital Elevation Models.
Water Resour. Res. 1997, 33, 309–319. [CrossRef]
7. Zhao, F.; Xiong, L.; Zhang, C.; Wei, H.; Liu, K.; Tang, G. Hydrological Object-Based Flow Direction Model for Constructing a
Lake-Stream Topological System. Water Resour. Res. 2023, 59, e2022WR033681. [CrossRef]
8. Xiong, L.; Jiang, R.; Lu, Q.; Yang, B.; Li, F.; Tang, G. Improved Priority-Flood Method for Depression Filling by Redundant
Calculation Optimization in Local Micro-Relief Areas. Trans. GIS 2019, 23, 259–274. [CrossRef]
9. Liu, X.; Wang, N.; Shao, J.; Chu, X. An Automated Processing Algorithm for Flat Areas Resulting from DEM Filling and
Interpolation. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2017, 6, 376. [CrossRef]
10. Yamazaki, D.; Ikeshima, D.; Sosa, J.; Bates, P.D.; Allen, G.H.; Pavelsky, T.M. MERIT Hydro: A high-resolution global hydrography
map based on latest topography dataset. Water Resour. Res. 2019, 55, 5053–5073. [CrossRef]
11. Lehner, B.; Grill, G. Global River Hydrography and Network Routing: Baseline Data and New Approaches to Study the World’s
Large River Systems. Hydrol. Process. 2013, 27, 2171–2186. [CrossRef]
12. Jain, M.K.; Kothyari, U.C. Estimation of Soil Erosion and Sediment Yield Using GIS. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2000, 45, 771–786. [CrossRef]
13. Moore, I.D.; Wilson, J.P. Length-Slope Factors for the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation: Simplified Method of Estimation. J.
Soil Water Conserv. 1992, 47, 423–428.
14. Xia, Y.; Li, X.; Wang, T. A Hybrid Flow Direction Algorithm for Water Routing on DEMs. Acta Geod. Cartogr. Sin. 2018, 47, 683.
15. Xiong, L.; Tang, G.; Yan, S.; Zhu, S.; Sun, Y. Landform-oriented flow-routing algorithm for the dual-structure loess terrain based
on digital elevation models. Hydrol. Process. 2014, 28, 1756–1766. [CrossRef]
16. Pei, T.; Qin, C.-Z.; Zhu, A.-X.; Yang, L.; Luo, M.; Li, B.; Zhou, C. Mapping Soil Organic Matter Using the Topographic Wetness
Index: A Comparative Study Based on Different Flow-Direction Algorithms and Kriging Methods. Ecol. Indic. 2010, 10, 610–619.
[CrossRef]
17. Zhang, H.; Shao, Z.; Sun, J.; Huang, X.; Yang, J. An Extended Watershed-Based AHP Model for Flood Hazard Estimation:
Constraining Runoff Converging Indicators via MFD-Derived Sub-Watershed by Maximum Zonal Statistical Method. Remote
Sens. 2022, 14, 2465. [CrossRef]
18. O’Callaghan, J.F.; Mark, D.M. The Extraction of Drainage Networks from Digital Elevation Data. Comput. Vis. Graph. Image
Process. 1984, 28, 323–344. [CrossRef]
19. Freeman, T.G. Calculating Catchment Area with Divergent Flow Based on a Regular Grid. Comput. Geosci. 1991, 17, 413–422.
[CrossRef]
20. Gallant, J.C.; Wilson, J.P. TAPES-G: A Grid-Based Terrain Analysis Program for the Environmental Sciences. Comput. Geosci. 1996,
22, 713–722. [CrossRef]
21. Quinn, P.; Beven, K.; Chevallier, P.; Planchon, O. The Prediction of Hillslope Flow Paths for Distributed Hydrological Modelling
Using Digital Terrain Models. Hydrol. Process. 1991, 5, 59–79. [CrossRef]
Water 2023, 15, 4111 19 of 19

22. Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Bai, J.; Zhou, Z. Quantifying the Spatial Flow of Soil Conservation Service to Optimize Land-Use
Pattern under Ecological Protection Scenarios. Front. Earth Sci. 2022, 10, 957520. [CrossRef]
23. Dai, W.; Xiong, L.; Antoniazza, G.; Tang, G.; Lane, S.N. Quantifying the Spatial Distribution of Sediment Transport in an
Experimental Gully System Using the Morphological Method. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2021, 46, 1188–1208. [CrossRef]
24. Dietrich, W.E.; Smith, J.D.; Dunne, T. Flow and Sediment Transport in a Sand Bedded Meander. J. Geol. 1979, 87, 305–315.
[CrossRef]
25. Dai, W.; Qian, W.; Liu, A.; Wang, C.; Yang, X.; Hu, G.; Tang, G. Monitoring and Modeling Sediment Transport in Space in Small
Loess Catchments Using UAV–SfM Photogrammetry. CATENA 2022, 214, 106244. [CrossRef]
26. Jenson, S.K.; Domingue, J.O. Extracting Topographic Structure from Digital Elevation Data for Geographic Information-System
Analysis. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 1988, 54, 1593–1600.
27. Lai, Z.; Li, S.; Lv, G.; Pan, Z.; Fei, G. Watershed Delineation Using Hydrographic Features and a DEM in Plain River Network
Region. Hydrol. Process. 2016, 30, 276–288. [CrossRef]
28. Turcotte, R.; Fortin, J.-P.; Rousseau, A.N.; Massicotte, S.; Villeneuve, J.-P. Determination of the Drainage Structure of a Watershed
Using a Digital Elevation Model and a Digital River and Lake Network. J. Hydrol. 2001, 240, 225–242. [CrossRef]
29. Qin, C.; Zhu, A.-X.; Pei, T.; Li, B.; Zhou, C.; Yang, L. An Adaptive Approach to Selecting a Flow-partition Exponent for a
Multiple-flow-direction Algorithm. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2007, 21, 443–458. [CrossRef]
30. Hairsine, P.B.; Rose, C.W. Rainfall Detachment and Deposition: Sediment Transport in the Absence of Flow-Driven Processes. Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1991, 55, 320–324. [CrossRef]
31. Antoniazza, G.; Bakker, M.; Lane, S.N. Revisiting the Morphological Method in Two-Dimensions to Quantify Bed-Material
Transport in Braided Rivers. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2019, 44, 2251–2267. [CrossRef]
32. Bakker, M.; Antoniazza, G.; Odermatt, E.; Lane, S.N. Morphological Response of an Alpine Braided Reach to Sediment-Laden
Flow Events. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 2019, 124, 1310–1328. [CrossRef]
33. Cui, L. The Coupling Relationship between the Sediment Yield from Rainfall Erosion and the Topographic Feature of the Watershed;
Northwest A&F University: Xianyang, China, 2002.
34. Hengl, T. Finding the Right Pixel Size. Comput. Geosci. 2006, 32, 1283–1298. [CrossRef]
35. Wechsler, S.P. Uncertainties Associated with Digital Elevation Models for Hydrologic Applications: A Review. Hydrol. Earth Syst.
Sci. 2007, 11, 1481–1500. [CrossRef]
36. Picco, L.; Mao, L.; Cavalli, M.; Buzzi, E.; Rainato, R.; Lenzi, M.A. Evaluating Short-Term Morphological Changes in a Gravel-Bed
Braided River Using Terrestrial Laser Scanner. Geomorphology 2013, 201, 323–334. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.