87 views

Uploaded by Anilu Jimenez

analisis hidrologico mediante metodos estadisticos

- Flood
- Application of Hec-hms in Rainfall-runoff and Flood Simulations in Lower Tapi Basin
- Indian Geography
- Rock catchment dam with self-closing watertap
- Identifying Drainage Issues.pdf
- Micro-Urbanism
- THE EVOLUTION OF CATCHMENT GULLIES IN STUDINET AND SIMILA WATERSHEDS, EASTERN ROMANIA, DURING THE LAST 25 YEARS
- 07 Chapter 5
- Describing Processes
- H.pdf
- one
- Main Report (Indonesia).pdf
- Sp Cover Contributors
- 1 Hydrologic Model Selection v4 DJMH
- 50.IJASRDEC201750
- thorpe creek lare grant feasibility study final application packet
- Grp1_Bacoor_Landuse
- exam2
- Arnold 2005
- 7. IJASR - Probability Analysis for Prediction of Annual Maxium Rainfall of One.pdf

You are on page 1of 24

HydroEurope Team 9

1/10/2010

TEAM 9

Introduction

The Var river catchment is located in the south of France close to the city of Nice. The Var catchment has

an area of about 2822 km2 and elevation from 3000 m in the mountains to 0 m at the mouth to the

Mediterranean Sea. In November 1994 the Var River experienced a heavy flood with a peak discharge of

3500 m3/s. The high flows in the river had destroyed two weirs and lead to a serious flooding in the areas

and damages on the infrastructures such as bridges and roads.

Objectives

The objective of this report is to carry out a hydrological analysis for the Var River basin. The objectives

include:

To perform a frequency analysis

To obtain an average rainfall using different methods

To determine the rainfall losses

To establish a unit hydrograph

To obtain surface runoff

To perform the flow propagation

Frequency Analysis

Hydrologic Frequency Analysis is the method used for evaluation of the probability of the hydrologic

events, which are averaged out in statistical viewpoints, either greater than or of a specific magnitude

within a certain area, that will occur within a certain period. In this report, we include the frequency

analysis based on the discharges as well as the rainfall recorded. In this case, we two approached of

frequency analysis were used: the first with according to Kleibulls law and the latter with the aid of the

probability software Ax.

With the Kleibulls Law, a daily and monthly average discharge analysis was carried out.

With daily average discharge data

With the daily recorded discharge data, a frequency analysis can be carried out. Firstly, the maximum

recorded daily average discharges were retrieved annually (Table 1) and followed by sorted all the

maximum yearly records in a descending order (Table 2). There were missing records between the Years

1977 till Year 1984. Therefore the records from year 1974 till year 1984 were not included in the analysis.

In addition, the return period and the percentage of probability of each record were determined. The

following tables show the corresponding information.

TEAM 9

However, the main objective of the frequency analysis is to find out the return period of the recorded

maximum discharge, therefore, we only considered the discharge records (as tabulated in Table 3) before

the occurrence of the highest discharge so as to obtain a more accurate frequency analysis.

Year

Qm (m /s)

1974

164.00

1975

223.00

1976

530.00

1977

0.00

1978

0.00

1979

0.00

1980

0.00

1981

0.00

1982

0.00

1983

0.00

1984

0.00

1985

481.00

1986

351.00

1987

352.00

1988

714.00

1989

207.00

1990

84.90

1991

778.00

1992

190.00

1993

1,050.00

1994

1,460.00

1995

193.00

1996

916.00

1997

459.00

1998

219.00

1999

248.00

2000

652.00

Table 1: Annually

records of maximum

daily record

Qo (m /s)

T (Year)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1,460.00

17.00

1,050.00

8.50

916.00

5.67

778.00

4.25

714.00

3.40

652.00

2.83

481.00

2.43

459.00

2.13

352.00

1.89

351.00

1.70

248.00

1.55

219.00

1.42

207.00

1.31

193.00

1.21

190.00

1.13

84.90

1.06

Table 2: Sorted records

P (%)

5.88

11.76

17.65

23.53

29.41

35.29

41.18

47.06

52.94

58.82

64.71

70.59

76.47

82.35

88.24

94.12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Qo (m /s)

T (Year)

P (%)

1050

10.00

10.00

778

5.00

20.00

714

3.33

30.00

481

2.50

40.00

352

2.00

50.00

351

1.67

60.00

207

1.43

70.00

190

1.25

80.00

84.9

1.11

90.00

Table 3: Sorted records excluding

year after maximum

The data in table 3 were plotted in a scattered graph and was fitted using different regression method

such as Exponential and Polynomial Second Order. Thus, the following results were obtained whereby R

Squared of each method was determined. Figure 1 and 2 illustrated the fitted graph with different

methods respectively.

TEAM 9

Frequency Analysis: Polynomial 2nd

Order

Data

Expon. (Data)

12

12

10

10

y = 0.851e0.002x

R = 0.976

8

6

4

2

0

Data

Poly. (Data)

R = 0.975

8

6

4

2

0

500

1000

Discharge (Qo)

1500

1000

Discharge (Qo)

1500

nd

Method

Exponential

Polynomial 2nd Order

500

R Squared

0.9769

0.9758

21.1

15.5

In another hand, we are also interested in finding the frequency based on maximum recorded monthly

discharge. Therefore, the maximum amounts monthly discharges were found annually (Table 5) and

subsequently were sorted out in a descending order. Same as the daily discharge analysis, there were

missing records between Years 1974 till year 1984; therefore we only considered the discharge

information after the Year of 1984.

The return period and the percentage of probability of each discharge were also determined, which

tabulated as the following Table 6. However, in order to determine the return period of the highest

discharges recorded, we only considered the discharge records before the occurrence of the highest

discharge to obtain a more accurate frequency analysis as tabulated in Table 7.

3

YEAR

Q (m3/s)

Qo (m /s)

T (Year)

P (%)

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

86.9

81.9

156

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

128

110

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

276

207

163

131

128

110

108

105

97.5

90.5

88.3

87.7

79.5

17.00

8.50

5.67

4.25

3.40

2.83

2.43

2.13

1.89

1.70

1.55

1.42

1.31

5.88

11.76

17.65

23.53

29.41

35.29

41.18

47.06

52.94

58.82

64.71

70.59

76.47

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Qo (m /s)

T (Year)

P (%)

207

10.00

10.00

131

5.00

20.00

128

3.33

30.00

110

2.50

40.00

108

2.00

50.00

105

1.67

60.00

90.5

1.43

70.00

88.3

1.25

80.00

38.3

1.11

90.00

Table 7: Sorted records excluding

year after maximum

TEAM 9

1987

105

1988

131

1989

88.3

1990

38.3

1991

108

1992

90.5

1993

207

1994

276

1995

77.9

1996

163

1997

97.5

1998

87.7

1999

79.5

2000

73.5

Table 5: Annually

records of maximum

monthly record

14

15

16

77.9

1.21

82.35

73.5

1.13

88.24

38.3

1.06

94.12

Table 6: Sorted records

The data in table 6 were plotted in a scattered graph and was fitted using different regression method

such as Exponential and Polynomial Second Order. Thus, the following results were obtained whereby R

Squared of each method was determined. Figure 3 and 4 illustrated the fitted graph with different

methods respectively.

Order

Data

12

Expon. (Data)

10

y = 0.454e0.014x

R = 0.870

8

6

Data

12

Return Period (T)

4

2

0

y=

10

Poly. (Data)

0.0003x2 -

0.026x + 1.322

R = 0.958

8

6

4

2

0

100

200

Discharge (Qo)

300

100

200

Discharge (Qo)

300

nd

Method

Exponential

Polynomial 2nd Order

R Squared

0.8707

0.9580

27.8

16.8

TEAM 9

Discharge Frequency Analysis with Ax Software

With the Ax probability software, there are several function can be used in the frequency analysis such as

Normal, LogNormal, Gumbel, Exponential, Gamma and Double Gamma function. The parameters of all

the functions are calculated with the methods of momentums and the maximum verisimilitude.

Therefore, we have carried out a frequency analysis with the comparison of different functions on a daily

and monthly average discharge records.

With daily average discharge data

Firstly, the annually data (Table 3) were introduced into the software. Thus frequency analyses with

different functions were executed and the following results were obtained. From the results, it showed

that the best fitted function would be the Exponential Function with a minimum error (Figure 5). With

the obtained function, the results were extrapolated as shown in the following Figure 6.

Figure 5: (Left)Frequency Analysis with Ax software (Daily); (Right) Exponential function graph

maximum discharge is recorded as 1460m3/s with

corresponded to the day event on 5th November 1994.

Therefore, by interpolating this value with the function

determined, we obtained the return period of 24.1 year.

TEAM 9

With comparison the both method of frequency analysis between the Kleibulls Law and the Ax Software

on the daily average discharge data, it can be conclude that both approached achieved a similar results.

Table 9 summarized the results of both methods.

Method

Kleibulls Law

Ax probability software

Function

Exponential

Exponential

21.1

24.1

Same as the daily discharge analysis, the annually data of the maximum monthly discharges (Table 7)

were introduced into the software. Thus frequency analyses with different functions were executed and

the following results were obtained. From the results, it showed that the best fitted function would be

the Gumbel Function with a minimum error (Figure 7).

Figure 7: (Left)Frequency Analysis with Ax software (Monthly); (Right) Gumbel function graph

TEAM 9

With the obtained function, the results were extrapolated as shown in the following Figure 10.

maximum discharge is recorded as 276m3/s. Therefore, by

interpolating this value with the function determined, we

obtained the return period of more that 140 year.

With comparison the both method of frequency analysis between the Kleibulls Law and the Ax Software

on the monthly discharge data, it can be conclude that both approaches obtained a very different results.

It can be conclude that the result obtained from the Ax probabability software is not applicable in our

case study due to overly estimated return period. This overestimation can be explained that could be

due to the extremely high rainfall event that happened in the particular month. Or may be the available

data are insufficient for extrapolation. Table 10 summarized the results of both methods.

Method

Kleibulls Law

Ax probability software

Function

Exponential

Gumbel

27.8

104.0

Table 10: Comparison of different methods on the daily discharge frequency analysis

The rainfall frequency analysis was carried out based on the data from three rainfall stations consist of

Nice Airport, St Dalmes Selvage and St Sauveur Tinee.

In order to carried out the rainfall frequency analysis, the same step is repeated as we did in the

discharge analysis whereby first of all the maximum precipitation of each year (From Year 1950 till Year

1993) is retrieved and followed by sorted out in a descending order. The Table 11 below tabulated the

rainfall information and the corresponding return period. As to study the return period of the most

serious rainfall occurred in 1994, we exclude the rainfall data from 1994 in the analysis.

m

1

2

3

4

5

Nice

191.40

146.80

137.10

126.00

117.80

St Dalmes Selvage

145.50

140.00

134.00

132.50

128.40

St Sauveur Tinee

123.50

118.00

108.00

101.20

100.70

Average

112.50

110.93

101.33

96.73

90.50

45.00

22.50

15.00

11.25

9.00

P (%)

2.22

4.44

6.67

8.89

11.11

TEAM 9

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

117.40

117.60

100.00

84.83

7.50

104.20

112.80

89.80

84.03

6.43

93.10

111.60

88.60

83.63

5.63

90.80

111.40

85.00

80.27

5.00

88.10

109.40

84.50

80.17

4.50

87.40

103.60

83.50

79.67

4.09

85.00

100.40

82.50

77.27

3.75

84.80

100.20

81.00

76.95

3.46

80.60

96.60

80.49

75.67

3.21

75.60

92.70

80.00

72.10

3.00

75.50

92.40

79.40

71.77

2.81

75.30

89.30

78.50

70.63

2.65

74.80

88.70

76.80

69.37

2.50

68.80

87.30

76.00

66.90

2.37

66.90

86.70

72.00

65.60

2.25

66.10

86.40

71.00

65.27

2.14

65.70

83.70

70.10

63.47

2.05

62.80

82.40

70.00

59.97

1.96

62.00

75.60

67.00

59.53

1.88

61.40

73.70

67.00

58.40

1.80

61.10

73.60

66.00

58.37

1.73

60.00

72.00

65.70

57.63

1.67

59.00

71.50

62.30

56.83

1.61

58.60

70.00

60.00

52.33

1.55

57.80

68.30

58.60

51.33

1.50

57.10

67.40

58.00

50.60

1.45

57.00

66.80

56.00

49.90

1.41

53.90

66.70

55.30

49.63

1.36

53.40

60.70

53.00

49.50

1.32

50.40

60.00

53.00

48.90

1.29

49.70

58.00

52.70

48.10

1.25

47.70

57.20

52.60

48.07

1.22

45.20

56.80

52.00

47.97

1.18

44.60

56.40

51.00

46.23

1.15

42.50

55.40

50.00

44.53

1.13

40.80

55.00

46.50

39.43

1.10

40.50

45.20

39.50

39.07

1.07

40.20

45.00

38.00

38.23

1.05

34.90

42.00

36.50

37.83

1.02

Table 11: Return Period of the corresponding maximum daily precipitation

13.33

15.56

17.78

20.00

22.22

24.44

26.67

28.89

31.11

33.33

35.56

37.78

40.00

42.22

44.44

46.67

48.89

51.11

53.33

55.56

57.78

60.00

62.22

64.44

66.67

68.89

71.11

73.33

75.56

77.78

80.00

82.22

84.44

86.67

88.89

91.11

93.33

95.56

97.78

From the above tabulated table, it is also possible to obtain the return period for the rainfall event on 5th

November 1994. For instance, in table following summarizes the return period for the average rainfall

obtained using different method.

Method

Average Rainfall(mm) Return Period (Year)

Arithmetic Mean

99.62

13.6

Thiessen Polygon

103.18

16.4

10

TEAM 9

In another hand, with the information tabulated in table 11, we perform the rainfall analysis with the aid

of the Ax probability software. The following outcomes were observed.

Nice Airport

From the following figure, it illustrates the results for the rainfall analysis of Nice Airport. With the aid of

Ax Probability software, the rainfall analysis was executed. In the Nice Airport station, the best function

to describe the rainfall pattern would be the Double Gumbel function whereby minimum error was found

with this function. Besides that in Figure 9, there was also a plot of the Double Gumbel Function as well

as an extrapolation table.

Figure 9: (Left)Rainfall Analysis with Ax software; Double Gumbel function graph (Right top), Extrapolation of

Double Gumbel function (Right bottom) for Nice Airport

10

11

TEAM 9

St Dalmes Selvage

From the following figure, it illustrates the results for the rainfall analysis of St Dalmes Selvage Station.

With the aid of Ax Probability software, the rainfall analysis was executed. In the St Dalmes Selvage

Station., the best function to describe the rainfall pattern would be the Gamma function whereby

minimum error was found with this function. Besides that in Figure 10, there was also a plot of the

Gamma Function as well as an extrapolation table.

Figure 10: (Left)Rainfall Analysis with Ax software, Gamma function graph (Right top), Extrapolation of Gamma

function (Right bottom) for St. Dalmes Selvage

11

12

TEAM 9

St Sauveur Tinee

From the following figure, it illustrates the results for the rainfall analysis of St Sauveur Tinee Station.

With the aid of Ax Probability software, the rainfall analysis was executed. In the St Sauveur Tinee

Station, the best function to describe the rainfall pattern would be the Gamma function whereby

minimum error was found with this function. Besides that in Figure 11, there was also a plot of the

Gamma Function as well as an extrapolation table.

Figure 11: (Left)Rainfall Analysis with Ax software, Gamma function graph (Right top), Extrapolation of Gamma

function (Right bottom) for St. Sauveur Tinee

12

13

TEAM 9

Average of the three station

We have also average out the rainfall recorded in all three stations and the following outcome is

observed. In the averaged rainfall, the best function to describe the rainfall pattern would be the Gamma

function. In Figure 12, there was also a plot of the Gamma Function as well as an extrapolation table.

Figure 12: (Left)Rainfall Analysis with Ax software, Gamma function graph (Right top), Extrapolation of Gamma

function (Right bottom) for the averaged rainfall from three station

13

14

TEAM 9

Average Rainfall

In order to find out the average rainfall over the basin, there several approaches could be used such as

the Arithmetic Mean, Thiessen Polygon, Isohyetal Method, Kriging Method asn IDW method.

In this report, there are two methods used in the hydrological assessment. They are the arithmetic mean

method and the theissen polygon method. In each methods two different approximations were carried

out which includes the approximation for the entire basin and approximation of each sub basin.

A straight arithmetic average is the simplest method to estimate the mean rainfall on the water basin.

This method achieved good estimation if the gauges are numerous and uniformly distributed over the

entire basin.

When gauges are nonuniformly distributed over a watershed, the thiessen polygon method can improve

estimated of precipitation amounts over the entire area. Polygons are formed from the perpendicular

bisectors of lines joining nearby gauges. The watershed area within each polygon is determined and is

used to apportion the rainfall amount of the gauge in the center of the polygon. It is assumed that the

depth of water recorded by rain gauge located within the polygon represents the depth of rain over the

entire area of the polygon. The results obtained are usually more accurate than the arithmetic average

when the number of gauges on a watershed is limited and when one or more gauges are located outside

the watershed boundary.

The Thiessen method allows for non uniform distribution of gauges but assumes linear variation of

precipitation between gauges. Once the area-weighing coefficients are determined for each station, the

value is fixed and the method is as simple to apply as the arithmetic method. Table following showed the

weighted coefficient of each rain gauge station for each sub catchment while Figure 13 illustrates the

boundary area of each rainfall station to the sub catchment.

SUB/STA

ST1

ST2

ST3

ST4

ST5

ST6

Tine

0

0.056 0.005 0.003 0.489 0.448

Vsubie

0

0.217

0

0

0

0.783

Upper Var

0

0.021 0.066 0.373 0.538 0.002

Estron

0.078 0.059 0.453 0.41

0

0

Lower Var 0.646 0.354

0

0

0

0

Table 12: Weighted Coefficient of Thiessen Polygon for each sub catchment

In Figure16, it illustrates the estimated average rainfall from both methods: Arithmetic Mean and

Thiessen Polygon Method.

Arithmetic Mean Method Thiessen Polygon Method

Total Precipitation (3/11/1994-6/11/1994)

138.27mm

145.63mm

Precipitation for day 5/11/1994

99.62mm (72% of total)

103.18mm (70.8% of total)

14

06/11/94 0:00

05/11/94 21:00

05/11/94 18:00

05/11/94 15:00

05/11/94 12:00

05/11/94 9:00

05/11/94 6:00

05/11/94 3:00

05/11/94 0:00

04/11/94 21:00

AVER

04/11/94 18:00

04/11/94 15:00

04/11/94 12:00

04/11/94 9:00

04/11/94 6:00

04/11/94 3:00

04/11/94 0:00

03/11/94 21:00

03/11/94 18:00

03/11/94 15:00

03/11/94 12:00

P (mm)

15

Hydrological Analysis: The Var River Catchment

TEAM 9

Average Rainfall

14.00

12.00

10.00

8.00

6.00

4.00

2.00

0.00

TPM

Time (hr)

Figure 14:Average Rainfall with Arithmetric Method and Thiessen Polygon Method

15

16

TEAM 9

Rainfall Losses: SCS Method

Rainfall losses always must be counted after the precipitation phase. The losses include interception,

depression storage and infiltration. Normally, infiltration contributes the greatest loss to a rainfall event,

and therefore most of the rainfall loss method focused only on Infiltration model whereby the other

losses such as evapotranspiration and depression storage were not considered in the case study. In this

Var River Basin, we employed SCS Curve Number (CN) method as the rainfall loss model.

The SCS curve number method is a simple, widely used and efficient method for determining the

approximate amount of runoff from a rainfall event in a particular area. The runoff curve number is based

on the area's hydrologic soil group, land use, treatment and hydrologic condition.

In order to determine the curve number of each sub basin, a weighted curve number method is used. A

weighted curve number is a weighted average based upon the area of each land cover type. Each curve

number is multiplied by the area of its respective land cover type. Table following tabulated the weighted

Curve Number used for each sub basin.

Soil use

Tine

Vsubie

Upper Var

Estron

Lower Var

Area (km )

Artificial surfaces

Agricultural areas

Forest and semi natural areas

Wetlands

Water bodies

1.80

2.34

2.43

5.67

13.05

35.91

734.13

376.74

1048.14

0.00

0.00

1.62

0.36

0.09

0.00

Weighted Curve Number for each Sub basin

Curve Number II

45.32

46.13

46.05

Curve Number III (Correction factor)

65.59

66.32

66.26

Table 13: Weighted Curve Number

General

CN

1.80

34.65

416.43

0.09

0.00

15.30

32.85

99.45

0.00

3.33

81.00

72.00

45.00

100.00

100.00

47.22

67.30

55.74

74.34

46.58

A correction factor is applied to the curve number with the following formula.

23

10 0.13

For the effective rainfall approximation for the entire basin, the calculation is made based on average

rainfall obtained with Arithmetic Mean Method and Thiessen Polygon Method.

16

TEAM 9

Effective Rainfall

01/03/00 0:00

24/02/00 0:00

18/02/00 0:00

12/02/00 0:00

06/02/00 0:00

31/01/00 0:00

25/01/00 0:00

19/01/00 0:00

13/01/00 0:00

07/01/00 0:00

01/01/00 0:00

Time (hr)

P (mm)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Effective Rainfall mm (Arithmetic)

Figure 15:SCS method Effective Rainfall obtained with Arithmetic and Thiessen Method

The following figure graphs the effective rainfall that obtained for each sub catchment. Besides that, in

the graph, it also shows the average effective rainfall from all the sub catchment.

16.00

14.00

SC1

12.00

Pe (mm)

SC2

10.00

8.00

SC3

6.00

SC4

4.00

SC5

2.00

TAVER

06/11/94 0:00

05/11/94 18:00

05/11/94 12:00

Time (hr)

05/11/94 6:00

05/11/94 0:00

04/11/94 18:00

04/11/94 12:00

04/11/94 6:00

04/11/94 0:00

03/11/94 18:00

0.00

03/11/94 12:00

17

Figure 16:SCS method Effective Rainfall obtained Thiessen Method for each sub basin

17

18

TEAM 9

Unit Hydrograph

The unit hydrograph method is used to calculate the direct runoff hydrograph at the watershed outlet

given the rainfall excess produced by a storm event. This method is categorized as a lumped method

whereby the physical characteristics of the watershed are not taken into account directly in the runoff

calculation. However, these characteristic are combined into a mathematical procedure named as unit

hydrograph.

A conceptual direct runoff hydrograph resulting from a rainfall excess of unit depth and constant

intensity for a particular watershed is called a unit hydrograph. The unit depth is normally defined as 1cm

in the SI unit system. The unit hydrograph influences the shape of the runoff hydrograph generated by

the model, particularly the peak rate of discharge. However, it does not affect the volume of runoff which

is determined by curve number.

In general, a unit hygrographs shape varies by watershed based on many factors, including: Watershed

size, slope, and length; Geomorphic and geologic characteristics; Amount of storage and the degree of

urbanization.

The method used to calculate the time of concentration is the average of the two methods of Kirpich and

Passini which the formulas are as following:

"# 0.066 %

&

).**

; ,-

(

/

&

"
0.108

; 1 2

0

Where S=sub catchment area in km2; L=Length of longest path in km, I= Slope in m/m

The following table shows the characteristic of the unit hydrograph for the whole catchment:

2

A (km )

2833.41

L (m)

124910.57

S

0.03

tc (h)

10.51

tr (h)

6.31

de (h)

1.00

tp (h)

6.81

qp

86.59

3

(m /s/mm)

Table 14: Unit Hydrograph Characteristic

18

TEAM 9

Unit Hydrograph

140

q (m3/s/mm)

19

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

0

10

t (h)

12

14

16

18

20

22

The following table shows the characteristic of the unit hydrograph for the each sub catchment:

SC1

SC2

SC3

SC4

SC5

2

A (km )

747.48

393.54

1,090.22

450.86

151.31

L (m)

70969.62

48,448.22

87,893.04

62,249.59

37,017.53

S

0.035

0.055

0.030

0.027

0.031

tc (h)

7.02

5.11

8.22

6.99

5.16

tr (h)

4.21

3.07

4.93

4.19

3.09

de (h)

5.30

4.52

5.74

5.29

4.54

de (h)

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

tp (h)

4.71

3.57

5.43

4.69

3.59

qp

32.99

22.96

41.73

19.98

8.76

3

(m /s/mm)

Table 15: Unit Hydrograph Characteristic for each sub catchment

19

TEAM 9

Unit Hydrograph of each sub catchment

45

40

35

30

q (m3/s/mm)

20

25

20

15

10

5

0

0

SC1

10

12

SC2

14 16

t (h)

SC3

18

20

22

SC4

24

26

28

SC5

20

TEAM 9

Surface Runoff

In order to find the surface runoff, the following formula is used:

4

34
5 16 74869:

6#:

The following Figure 20 and Table 16 compared the calculated discharge and the measured discharge for

the entire water basin.

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

Measured

11/6/1994 21:00

11/6/1994 9:00

11/6/1994 3:00

11/6/1994 15:00

Time (hr)

11/5/1994 21:00

11/5/1994 15:00

11/5/1994 9:00

11/5/1994 3:00

11/4/1994 21:00

11/4/1994 15:00

0

11/4/1994 9:00

Q (m3/s)

21

SCS Calculated

Figure 20: Comparison of Measured and Calculated discharge for the whole basin

V (m )

3

Qp (m /s)

Measured

Calculated

226,125,000.0

0

3680

210,455,441.9

9

3,935.01

Table 15: Comparison of Measured and Calculated discharge and volume for the whole basin

21

TEAM 9

Approximation of the sum of all sub catchments

The following Figure21, compare the measured discharge and the calculated discharge by summing up

the results from each sub catchment. Also, the table 16 provides the numerical values of discharge and

volume.

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,000

Q (m3/s)

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

MEASURED

07/11/94 0:00

06/11/94 12:00

t (hr)

06/11/94 0:00

05/11/94 12:00

05/11/94 0:00

04/11/94 12:00

0

04/11/94 0:00

22

CALCULATED

Figure 21: Comparison of Measured and Calculated discharge graph for the whole basin with summing up

information of each sub basin

V (m )

3

Qp (m /s)

Mea.

226,125,000.0

0

3680

Cal.

217257842.8

3824.31

Table 16: Comparison of Measured and Calculated discharge and volume for the whole basin with summing up

information of each sub basin

22

TEAM 9

The Muskingum method is a hydrologic river routing technique based on the equation of continuity.

Given the inow at the upstream end of a river reach, the outow at the downstream end is expressed as

0:

0;

<

3:

3;

: < ;

where I is the inow rate to the reach, Q the outow; S the volume of water stored, and at the time

increment. The subscripts 1 and 2 denote the values of the respective terms at the beginning and end of

the time interval considered. The storage within the reach is modeled by

1 < ?@A

,>?0

Where S = reach storage, I = inflow discharge, O = outflow discharge, K = storage constant, X = weighting

factor.

Combining equations 1 and 2 and simplifying results:

@;
B) 0; B: 0: B; @:

Where;

,? < 0.5

B)

, < ,? 0.5

B:

,? 0.5

, < ,? 0.5

B;

, < ,? 0.5

The following graph illustrated the graph after routing with Muskingum Method:

Flood Routing

MEASURED

After routing

07/11/94 0:00

06/11/94 12:00

t (hr)

06/11/94 0:00

05/11/94 12:00

05/11/94 0:00

04/11/94 12:00

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

04/11/94 0:00

Q (m3/s)

23

23

TEAM 9

The following Figure illustrates the comparison of hydrograph from all method used.

Hydrograph

4,000

3,500

3,000

Q (m3/s)

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

MEASURED

Arithmetic Mean

Thiessen Polygon

07/11/94 0:00

06/11/94 12:00

t (hr)

06/11/94 0:00

05/11/94 12:00

05/11/94 0:00

04/11/94 12:00

0

04/11/94 0:00

24

After routing

References

Chow, V.T. (1975) Hydrologie modeling. Selected Works in Water Resources, IWRA, March.

Cunge, J A (1969) On the subject of a flood propagation method (Muskingum method) J Hydr Res IAHR, 7,

pp205-30

Jimenez, M., Domimguez, R., y Cruz, M. (1997). Manual de operacin del programa AX.EXE. CENAPRED,

Mxico, 32 pp.

Nana, L. y Gmez, M. (204). Ingeniera Hidrolgica. Grupo Editorial Universitario, Espaa, 278 pp.

24

- FloodUploaded byAjid Tantoko
- Application of Hec-hms in Rainfall-runoff and Flood Simulations in Lower Tapi BasinUploaded byankitbalyan
- Indian GeographyUploaded byTage Nobin
- Rock catchment dam with self-closing watertapUploaded byGreen Action Sustainable Technology Group
- Identifying Drainage Issues.pdfUploaded byBernard Palmer
- Micro-UrbanismUploaded bycamiayoung
- THE EVOLUTION OF CATCHMENT GULLIES IN STUDINET AND SIMILA WATERSHEDS, EASTERN ROMANIA, DURING THE LAST 25 YEARSUploaded byCosmin Hurjui
- 07 Chapter 5Uploaded byA. D. Prasad
- Describing ProcessesUploaded bySahriil Affandi
- H.pdfUploaded bySteven R. Ranson
- oneUploaded byashokndce
- Main Report (Indonesia).pdfUploaded byAnandaEndin
- Sp Cover ContributorsUploaded bySudharsananPRS
- 1 Hydrologic Model Selection v4 DJMHUploaded byBenjamin Gossweiler
- 50.IJASRDEC201750Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- thorpe creek lare grant feasibility study final application packetUploaded byapi-114423208
- Grp1_Bacoor_LanduseUploaded byKjMmt
- exam2Uploaded byTrang Le
- Arnold 2005Uploaded byDjango Boyee
- 7. IJASR - Probability Analysis for Prediction of Annual Maxium Rainfall of One.pdfUploaded byAnonymous lELZF50
- Sewer Line DesignUploaded byB SRINIVAS
- ER A3-1 Understanding the Water Cycle and Its Importance toUploaded byAl Wafa Ali
- pt i mono lake exercises 1Uploaded byapi-373998589
- Capitulo V_hidraulica InglesUploaded byJoel Leonardo Rivera Olivos
- Eileen Poeter Sep-06 Refer en CIAUploaded byteiwaz_555
- 2. Supply and Demand Gap AnalysisUploaded byJustine Anthony Salazar
- 02 ListingUploaded byMilenko Tulencic
- Dahasahasra PresentationUploaded byadbwaterforall
- FF WORKSUploaded byRak
- Highly Effective Plumbing Tips That Work Well.20130304.134110Uploaded byclubsense26

- Waste Oil RefiningUploaded byJohn simpson
- Chapter 8 ArmstrongUploaded byr2ddragon
- 154673329 Ntpc Btps Electrical Project Report 2013Uploaded byravi kumar
- Specification for Bored Pile.pdfUploaded byXuanDang Vung Tau
- [123doc] - 11cb-unit-10-3-testUploaded byphung my
- Dimethyl Ether C2H6O Safety Data Sheet SDS P4589Uploaded byDeni Eka Sobirin
- Stabilisattion for laong lasting pavementUploaded byBIJAY KRISHNA DAS
- Thesis Distributed Renewable Energy Generation in IndiaUploaded bykeinhuat79
- 2013-05-27_voith_pelton_turbines.pdfUploaded byArief Rachman
- Important -Sslc English Unit Test 24 With Study Materials-2016-2017 for Centum StudentsUploaded bychitraravi
- david krady vernal pondsUploaded byapi-333160719
- MSDS 42112NUploaded byElias
- ST. Lawrence Wind DEIS IUploaded bypandorasboxofrocks
- Exer 3 OutputUploaded byMaika Sibulo Doronela
- Sika PDS_E_Plastiment TM -25Uploaded bylwin_oo2435
- 1492-4918-1-PBUploaded byvlnsudhish
- EvaporationUploaded bysimba8661
- 7_ Ionic CompoundsUploaded byMarie Spencer Dunn
- CE6301 NotesUploaded byvijaigk
- (3) Sustainable Land Management Sourcebook.pdfUploaded bySuper Pippo
- Co-Ordinated and Congruent Phosphate Treatment of Boiler WaterUploaded byRavi Shankar
- Analysing Underground ContaminationUploaded byRajesh Bhandari
- Calculations for Process Heat LoadsUploaded byrkss
- Modeling the spatiotemporal pattern of farmland change in rural regions of Ahvaz County by remote sensing and landscape metricsUploaded byreviewjre
- Hot Water ManualUploaded byeatmybutthole
- AQA Chemistry GCSE Unit 1 Mark Scheme June 12Uploaded byFred Mate
- New Microsoft Word Document.docxUploaded byLokmani
- RESTORATIVE MEASURES IN NIGEEN LAKE MANAGEMENT.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- SIP Methodology and ObjectivesUploaded byShermin Azneita
- BaltanganUploaded byJolly Beh