Hypothesis 2: The angularity of the channels load will decrease from site 1 to site 5:Looking at graph 6, you can see that the angular class of most of the pebbles is 4. This means that most of the pebbles are fairly rough, with a quite a few angular points. It is also clear that very few of the rocks are actually very smooth rocks 3 and 7 have the lowest angular class of 2 on the Powers scale. There was only one rock (rock 11) which was smooth and had an angularity class of 1. This means that at site 1, the rocks were mainly quite angular.Looking at graph 7, it is clear that most of the rocks are fairly smooth with an angular class of 3 or below. However, there are four rocks with a fairly high angular class. These are rocks 1, 3, 7 and 9. Most of the rocks at site 2 had an angular class of 2, so the rocks here were quite smooth.Moving on to graph 8, the rocks seem to be split into about 2 classes. About half of them seem to be very angular, and the other half seem to be quite smooth with only three being in between. For example, there are eight rocks with and angular class of 2, and there are 7 rocks with an angular class of 6. The rest either have an angular class of 3 or 4, so the rocks here are a bit smooth, with quite a few rugged edges.In relation to site graph 9, most of the rocks seem to be fairly angular with only one rock having an angular class of 5. There are six rocks with an angular class of 2, however the rest of the rocks have an angular class of 3 or above, meaning that there are mostly angular rocks at site 4.Looking at graph 10, most of the rocks seem to be very angular with 9 having an angular class of 5 or 6. There are only 4 rocks with an angular class of 2 and the rest of the rocks are either 3 or above. Therefore, I can conclude from this that at site 5. The rocks were mainly angular.Overall, the channels load did not decrease from sites 1 to 5. This means that my hypothesis has been disproved. We know this because and sites 1, 4 and 5, the rocks were mainly angular and did not seem to decrease. In fact, the number of angular rocks at site 5 is higher than in site 1. Therefore, the angularity of the channels load did not decrease from site 1 to site 5.Hypothesis 4: The velocity will increase from site 1 to site 5:Looking at graph number 16, a red line showing what should happen has been put in. By looking at the points, it is clear to see whether this trend has been followed. The lowest velocities were at site 1 and 4, which both had a velocity of 0.33m/s, whereas the highest velocity was at site 3 which had a velocity of 0.53m/s. Site 5 had a higher velocity than site 4 it had a velocity of 0.4m/s. Site 2 had a velocity slightly higher with 0.47m/s. Overall, it is very clear that the data did not follow the expected trend. The velocity was supposed to increase in a way it did because site 5 had a higher velocity than site 1, however overall, the data did not follow the trend. The velocity increased from sites 1 to 3, and then decreased at site 4 and increased again at site 5. Therefore, my hypothesis has been disproved. The velocity did not increase from site 1 to 5.Hypothesis 5: The channel will get wider and deeper from site 1 to site 5.