In cooperation with the South Carolina, Georgia, and North Carolina Departments of Transportation and the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program

Similar documents
Bayesian GLS for Regionalization of Flood Characteristics in Korea

Figure 0-18: Dendrogeomorphic analysis of streambank erosion and floodplain deposition (from Noe and others, 2015a)

Issue 44: Phase II & III H&H Issues Date: 07/03/2006 Page 1

StreamStats: Delivering Streamflow Information to the Public. By Kernell Ries

BAYESIAN GLS REGRESSION, LEVERAGE, AND INFLUENCE FOR REGIONALIZATION OF HYDROLOGIC STATISTICS

Rainfall Analysis. Prof. M.M.M. Najim

Introduction Fluvial Processes in Small Southeastern Watersheds

Appendix D. Model Setup, Calibration, and Validation

Sediment and nutrient transport and storage along the urban stream corridor

Nutrient and Sediment Cycling and Retention in Urban Floodplain Wetlands

NEW YORK STATE WATER RESOURCES INSTITUTE Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering

Recurrence Intervals for the June 2006 Flood in Delaware and Otsego counties, New York

GIS Techniques for Floodplain Delineation. Dean Djokic

A New Probabilistic Rational Method for design flood estimation in ungauged catchments for the State of New South Wales in Australia

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GADSDEN ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i)-(xii)

STREAM SYSTEMS and FLOODS

Precipitation Evaporation Infiltration Earth s Water and the Hydrologic Cycle. Runoff Transpiration

Regional Flood Estimation for NSW: Comparison of Quantile Regression and Parameter Regression Techniques

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT YATES ASH POND 2 (AP-2) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

CR AAO Bridge. Dead River Flood & Natural Channel Design. Mitch Koetje Water Resources Division UP District

ENGINEERING HYDROLOGY

Pequabuck River Flooding Study and Flood Mitigation Plan The City of Bristol and Towns of Plainville and Plymouth, CT

Development of Improved Stream Mapping for NC

UPPER COSUMNES RIVER FLOOD MAPPING

The effects of errors in measuring drainage basin area on regionalized estimates of mean annual flood: a simulation study

Design Flood Estimation in Ungauged Catchments: Quantile Regression Technique And Probabilistic Rational Method Compared

Digital Michigan Tech. Michigan Technological University. Fredline Ilorme Michigan Technological University

Factors influencing nutrient and sediment retention by riverine wetlands in the Chesapeake watershed Greg Noe, Cliff Hupp, Ed Schenk, Nancy Rybicki

Low Low Water in Puget Sound vs. Mean Sea Level. What do the flood event gauge readings at Sedro Woolley really mean?

Recurrence Interval for the 2006 Flood Delaware and Otsego County, New York

Changes to Extreme Precipitation Events: What the Historical Record Shows and What It Means for Engineers

Appendix E Guidance for Shallow Flooding Analyses and Mapping

Development of a Fluvial Erosion Hazard Mitigation Program for Indiana

GISHydro2000: A Tool for Automated Hydrologic Analysis in Maryland. G. E. Moglen 1

Climate. Annual Temperature (Last 30 Years) January Temperature. July Temperature. Average Precipitation (Last 30 Years)

OBJECTIVES. Fluvial Geomorphology? STREAM CLASSIFICATION & RIVER ASSESSMENT

FHWA - HIGHWAY HYDROLOGY

ENVG/SC 10110L-20110L PLANET EARTH LABORATORY. Laboratory #9: Surface Hydrology & Map Scale

!"#$%&&'()*+#$%(,-./0*)%(!

Section 4: Model Development and Application

Flood Hazard Inundation Mapping. Presentation. Flood Hazard Mapping

Local Flood Hazards. Click here for Real-time River Information

Influence of the Major Drainages to the Mississippi River and Implications for System Level Management

Flow regime, floodplain inundation and floodplain waterbody connectivity at Congaree National Park

WATER ON AND UNDER GROUND. Objectives. The Hydrologic Cycle

Hydraulic Geometry Curves and Bankfull Recurrence in the Pee Dee River Basin

Figure 1. Which part of the river is labelled in Figure 1? a) Mouth b) Source c) Lower course d) channel

Template for Sediment and Erosion Control Plan General Instructions. Section Instructions

Hydrologic Engineering Center U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Davis, California. September 2000

Floods. Brian McCallum, USGS GA Water Science Center Georgia Association Floodplain Managers Annual Conference March 24, 2010

Dealing with Zone A Flood Zones. Topics of Discussion. What is a Zone A Floodplain?

Fresh Water: Streams, Lakes Groundwater & Wetlands

Earth Science Chapter 9. Day 6 - Finish Capillary Action Lab - Quiz over Notes - Review Worksheets over Sections 9.2 and 9.3

APPENDIX B WORKSHEETS & EXHIBITS

Summary. Streams and Drainage Systems


UGRC 144 Science and Technology in Our Lives/Geohazards

Chapter 5 CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION

COMPARISON OF LABORATORY AND FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF BRIDGE PIER SCOUR

Stream Geomorphology. Leslie A. Morrissey UVM July 25, 2012

ARMSTRONG COUNTY, PA

Red River Levee Panel

Parametric Test. Multiple Linear Regression Spatial Application I: State Homicide Rates Equations taken from Zar, 1984.

Fluvial Erosion Impacts on Infrastructure Along Indiana Rivers and Streams

Flood and runoff estimation on small catchments. Duncan Faulkner

Engineering Hydrology

Pompton Lakes Dam Downstream Effects of the Floodgate Facility. Joseph Ruggeri Brian Cahill Michael Mak Andy Bonner

Community Discovery Data Questionnaire

Continuing Education Associated with Maintaining CPESC and CESSWI Certification

Flood Forecasting Tools for Ungauged Streams in Alberta: Status and Lessons from the Flood of 2013

COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM FLOODS INTRODUCTION

Appendix C. Questionnaire Summary of Responses Geographic Information Systems

Flood Map. National Dataset User Guide

The MRCC and Monitoring Drought in the Midwest

Gully Erosion Part 1 GULLY EROSION AND ITS CAUSES. Introduction. The mechanics of gully erosion

Geologic Hazards. Montour County Multi-jurisdictional. General. Earthquake

VINCENT COOPER Flood Hazard Mapping Consultant

3D Elevation Program, Lidar in Missouri. West Central Regional Advanced LiDAR Workshop Ray Fox

Controlling Processes That Change Land

Introducing Iowa StreamStats Version 4, a Redesign of the USGS Application for Estimating Streamflow Stats

Basin-scale analysis of long-term sediment-generation rates derived from 10 Be in river sediment:

Running Water Earth - Chapter 16 Stan Hatfield Southwestern Illinois College

Flood Frequency and Hazard Analysis of Santa Barbara s Mission Creek

Impacts of precipitation interpolation on hydrologic modeling in data scarce regions

Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams

May 7, Roger Leventhal, P.E. Marin County Public Works Laurel Collins Watershed Sciences

Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment. Appendix J. Vermont Regional Hydraulic Geometry Curves

Each basin is surrounded & defined by a drainage divide (high point from which water flows away) Channel initiation

PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES

ALDERON IRON ORE CORP. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT KAMI IRON ORE MINE AND RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE, LABRADOR. Appendix P

Hydrologic Forecast Centre Manitoba Infrastructure, Winnipeg, Manitoba. FEBRUARY OUTLOOK REPORT FOR MANITOBA February 23, 2018

Categorical Predictor Variables

How Significant is the BIAS in Low Flow Quantiles Estimated by L- and LH-Moments?

Chapter 2. Regional Landscapes and the Hydrologic Cycle

Hydraulic Impacts of Limestone Quarries and Gravel Pits. Jeff Green Minnesota DNR-Division of Ecological & Water Resources

THE RECURRENCE INTERVAL

6.4 Sensitivity Tests

DRAFT Design Hydraulic Study. Bridge 04C-0055, Mattole Road Bridge over Mattole River at Honeydew. Humboldt County. Prepared for:

Floodplain Morphometry Extraction from a High Resolution Digital Elevation Model: a Simple Algorithm for Regional Analysis Studies

GOAL 7 AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL DISASTERS AND HAZARDS. To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards.

Transcription:

In cooperation with the South Carolina, Georgia, and North Carolina Departments of Transportation and the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program (Division of Emergency Management) Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in Rural Basins of South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia

Why estimate the magnitude and frequency of floods?

Cost-Effective Design of Roads and Bridges

Design of dams, levees, culverts and other floodcontrol structures

Flood-plain management and risk assessment

Log-Pearson Type III Distribution U.S. Water Advisory Committee on Water Data (1982) recommended the log-pearson Type III Distribution for flood frequency analyses. The log-pearson Type III distribution is calculated using the general equation: Log Q T = log X mean + KS where Q T is the flood discharge for the specified return interval T; log X mean is the mean of the log x discharge values; K is a frequency factor; and S is the standard deviation of the log x values.

What about this K value? Log Q T = log X mean + KS K, the frequency factor, is a function of skew and return interval.

Skew describes the symmetry (or asymmetry) in a data sample Let s talk about skew Mean identical or close to median Mean less than median Mean greater than median Negative skew Positive skew

Any point, x i, in this data set can be defined by two things. x i = x mean + deviation Log Q T = log X mean + KS So, peak-flow values possess two important properties: (1) the tendency to deviate from the mean; and (2) the frequency of occurrence. The K value is a function of skew and recurrence interval and acts as an adjustment to the standard deviation based on recurrence interval.

Why is a Regional Skew Desirable? Log Q T = log X mean + KS Remember K is a function of the skew and the recurrence interval. The skew coefficient for a given station is sensitive to extreme events making it difficult to obtain an accurate skew estimate from small samples. The accuracy of the estimated skew can be improved by weighting the station skew with a generalized skew estimated by pooling information from numerous stations.

Skew Sensitivity

Skew and Q100 Sensitivity

Updated regional skew A. Gruber and J. R. Stedinger Regional skew was updated based on analyses of 342 sites (after screenings) across South Carolina, Georgia, North Carolina, and surrounding states Applied Bayesian GLS statistical methods in efforts to develop the best model of regional skew based on explanatory variables (25 basin characteristics) When completed, determined that a constant skew was applicable to entire 3-state study area Regional skew = -0.0186, MSE = 0.0831, equivalent record length 69 years (compared to B17 skew map s equivalent record length of 17 years (MSE = 0.3025))

Stations Included In The Regional Regression 64 stations in South Carolina 303 stations in North Carolina 310 stations in Georgia 20 stations in Alabama 23 stations in Florida 40 stations in Tennessee 68 stations in Virginia Total of 828 sites

EPA Level III Ecoregions

Based on initial regressions and assessing residuals, several regions were found to react similarly with respect to floods and therefore, were grouped together. Hydrologic Regions

Hydrologic Regions Region 1: Ridge/Valley and Piedmont Region 2: Blue Ridge Region 3: Sandhills Region 4: Coastal Region 5: Southwest Georgia

Let s take a look at the Q100 data by Hydrologic Regions (stations draining at least 75% from one region).

In the regression analysis from the previous South Carolina floodfrequency investigations, we have only included stations draining at least 75% from one region (physiographic province), which is standard practice. In 2007, Stedinger and Griffis published a paper using the peakflow data base from the previous South Carolina flood-frequency investigation. In that paper, they used a pooled regression analysis in which a qualitative variable was included for physiographic region. This is similar to what Feaster and Tasker did for the Piedmont and upper Coastal Plain.

Stedinger noted that for regions with relatively few sites, pooling the data allows for development of a more accurate model. The pooled approach allows for a common slope with different intercepts, which makes sense if one believes the basin time of concentration should scale with area to a power. The different intercepts allow for differences in runoff volume due to differences in soil characteristics, land cover, storage area, slope, etc.

In our current study, we have done something similar. Instead of using a qualitative variable, we included percent region as a variable. Consequently, along with drainage area, slope, main channel length, etc., we have variables for %BR, %RV-PD, %SH, etc. We also tested for statistically significant differences in the slopes of the regional curves and found that the Blue Ridge and Sandhills had slopes that were statistically different from the other regions. Consequently, we added a cross product of %BRxDA and %SHxDA. Those variables allow for a difference in the slopes of those regions. What this allows us to do now is take advantage of a much larger range of hydrologic experiences while still accounting for the regional differences.

This study includes 83 stations that drain from multiple regions. In the past, these stations would not have been included in the regression analyses.

What do the preliminary equations look like. For Q100: Q100 = 10 (0.02912*PCTRVPD + 0.02775*PCTBR + 0.02046*PCTSH + 0.02602*PCTCOAST + 0.02858*PCTSWGA) x DA 0.00139*PCTSH) (0.590 + 0.00120*PCTBR + It looks a little scary but it s really not that bad.

For 100% in the RV-PD region, Q100 collapses to: Q100 = 817 DA 0.590 Muuuch Better!

So how does the equation work? Let s look at an example of moving from a site that drains 100% from the Piedmont to a site that drains 100% from the Blue Ridge.

Both the intercept and slope are adjusted.

These are the provisional curves for Q100 when a site drains 100% from each Hydrologic Region.

Acknowledgements Tony Gotvald, GAWSC Curtis Weaver, NCWSC Larry Bohman, USGS-SE Tim Cohn, USGS-OSW Jery Stedinger, Cornell University Andrea Gruber, Cornell University

Questions?