USING A GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM TO PREDICT FLOW DURATION CURVES AT UNGAGED STREAM SITES IN GUAM Dr. Leroy F. Heitz lheitz@triton.uog.edu Dr. Shahram Khosrowpanah khosrow@triton.uog.edu Water and Environmental Research Institute of the Western Pacific, University of Guam, Mangilao, Guam, USA Page 1
ALWAYS A NEED FOR HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION WATER SUPPLY RESERVOIRS INSTREAM FLOWS Page 2 HYDROPOWER
HYDROLOGIC DATA NEEDS THAT WE CONCENTRATED ON AVERAGE FLOWS IN STREAMS FLOW VARIABILITY IN STREAMS Page 3
WHAT S THIS PROJECT IS ALL ABOUT AGE OLD HYDROLOGY PROBLEM GAGE SITE AT GAGE SITES We Can Compute AVERAGE FLOW AND FLOW VARIABILITY Page 4
WHAT S THIS PROJECT ALL ABOUT UN-GAGED STREAM SITES?? NO DATA Page 5
PROJECT GOALS DEVELOP AVERAGE FLOW AND FLOW VARIABILITY FOR UN-GAGED STREAM SITES IN SOUTH GUAM FOR ALL POINTS ALONG MAJOR STREAMS FOR SIMILAR SEGMENTS OF STREAMS CALLED REACHES Page 6
FIRST STEP WAS TO DEVELOP CURVES THAT DESCRIBE FLOW VARIABILITY AT GAGED SITES Page 7
STREAM GAGES USED IN THE PROJECT GUAM STREAMFLOW DATA AVAILABILITY (53-82) MISSING DATA 1/1/1953 1/1/1955 1/1/1957 1/1/1959 1/1/1961 1/1/1963 1/1/1965 1/1/1967 1/1/1969 1/1/1971 1/1/1973 1/1/1975 1/1/1977 1/1/1979 1/1/1981 1/1/1983 Aplacho River 2.3 Umatac River 8.52 La Sa Fua River 4.42 Imong River 9.71 Almagosa River 6.4 Maulap River 5.09 Ugum above 24.34 Ugum River near 29.33 Pago River 25.7 Ylig River 27.56 Finile 1.41 Inarajan 17.48 Tianaga 5.61 Cetti River 4.34 Geus 3.00 La Sa Fua 4.42 Tolyaeyuus Agat 20.18 Talofofo 48.76 Lonfit 10.23 Page 8
UMATAC GAGE FLOW DATA FROM USGS WEB SITE # Data provided for site 16816000 # DD parameter statistic Description # 01 00060 00003 Discharge, cubic feet per second (Mean) # # Data-value qualification codes included in this output: # A Approved for publication -- Processing and review completed. # e Value has been estimated. # agency_cd site_no datetime 01_00060_01_00060_00003_cd 5s 15s 20d 14n 10s USGS 16816000 10/1/1952 10 A USGS 16816000 10/2/1952 7.8 A USGS 16816000 10/3/1952 7.8 A USGS 16816000 10/4/1952 6.6 A USGS 16816000 10/5/1952 8.4 A USGS 16816000 10/6/1952 5.8 A USGS 16816000 10/7/1952 16 A USGS 16816000 10/8/1952 8.9 A USGS 16816000 10/9/1952 18 A DAILY AVERAGE FLOW CFS Page 9
UMATAC GAGE FLOW DURATION CURVE SIMPLE STATISTICAL FLOW VARIABILITY REPRESENTATION UMATAC FLOW DURATON ALL DATA 1000 100 16.5 10 Flow FLOW IN CFS 1.1 1 0.1 0.01 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of time flow is PERCENT equaled OF TIME FLOW IS EQUALED or exceeded OR EXCEEDED 10 80 Page 10
PARAMETRIC FLOW DURATION CURVE DATA GAGE AVG 0% 10% 30% 50% 80% 95% UMATAC 8.62 563.00 16.82 6.18 3.49 1.14 0.62 IMONG 10.22 498.00 18.96 7.63 4.70 2.35 1.33 PAGO 26.40 2540.00 50.61 15.61 7.76 1.62 0.35 YLIG 28.56 2050.00 54.98 19.84 10.66 2.38 0.72 FINILE 1.40 50.00 2.76 1.32 0.87 0.35 0.13 INARAJAN 17.46 1580.00 30.25 11.88 7.15 2.71 1.46 TINAGO 5.73 1080.00 10.00 4.00 2.17 0.66 0.31 GUESS 3.02 550.00 5.38 1.74 0.88 0.23 0.05 UGUM NR 29.77 1790.00 53.18 26.50 15.62 6.64 4.16 FROM DURATION CURVES: PICK OFF AVERAGE, 0%, 10%, 30%, 50%, 80%, AND 95% FOR EACH GAGE PLOT ALL: 0% VS AVERAGE, 10% VERSUS AVERAGE, 30%VS AVERAGE, 50% VS AVERAGE, 80% VS AVERAGE, AND 95% VS AVERAGE Page 11
PARAMETRIC FLOW DURATION CURVES EXCEEDANCE PERCENT FLOW (CFS) EXCEEDANCE PERCENT FLOW (CFS) 10000.00 1000.00 100.00 10.00 1.00 PARAMETRIC CURVES (1953-1982) 0 % 10 % 30 % 50 % 80 % 95 % y = 81.522x 0.9961 R² = 0.7854 y = 1.876x 0.9939 R² = 0.9978 y = 0.769x 0.9698 R² = 0.9767 y = 0.4602x 0.9449 R² = 0.9466 y = 0.1701x 0.8865 R² = 0.7822 y = 0.0618x 0.9309 R² = 0.5643 0.10 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) 0% 10% 30% 50% 80% 95% Power (0%) Power (10%) Power (30%) Power (50%) Power (80%) Power (95%) WE GET A REGRESSION EQUATION FOR EACH DATA SET Page 12
USING PARAMETRIC FLOW DURATION CURVES TO PREDICT DURATION CURVE AT AN UN-GAGED SITE EXCEEDANCE PERCENT FLOW (CFS) EXCEEDANCE PERCENT FLOW (CFS) 10000.00 1000.00 100.00 10.00 1.00 PARAMETRIC CURVES (1953-1982) 0 % 10 % 30 % 50 % 80 % 95 % y = 81.522x 0.9961 R² = 0.7854 y = 1.876x 0.9939 R² = 0.9978 y = 0.769x 0.9698 R² = 0.9767 y = 0.4602x 0.9449 R² = 0.9466 y = 0.1701x 0.8865 R² = 0.7822 y = 0.0618x 0.9309 R² = 0.5643 0.10 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) 25 CFS 0% 10% 30% 50% 80% 95% Power (0%) Power (10%) Power (30%) Power (50%) Power (80%) Power (95%) Page 13
RECONSTRUCTED SITE FLOW DURATION CURVE FOR AVG. Q = 25 CFS) 10000.0 SITE FLOW DURATION CURVE 1000.0 FLOW (CFS) FLOW IN CFS 100.0 10.0 1.0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% EXCEEDANCE PERCENT EXCEEDANCE PERCENT Page 14
WE ARE ½ WAY THERE WHAT WAS NEEDED NEXT WAS A WAY TO PREDICT THE AVERAGE FLOW AT OUR UNGAGED RIVER LOCATIONS Page 15
WE USED SOME GIS BLACK MAGIC TO GET THE AVERAGE FLOWS Page 16
STARTING POINT WAS NORMAL ANNUAL PRECIPITATION (NAP) LINES from WERI Technical Report 102 By Guard and Lander As Modified by M. Lander Page 17
DEVELOPED NORMAL ANNUAL PRECIPITATION GRID FROM NAP LINES USING GIS EACH GRID SQUARE CONTAINS THE VALUE OF THE AVERAGE ANNUAL RAIN FALLING ON THAT SQUARE USED TOPO TO RASTER TOOL Page 18
IF WE COULD ADD UP ALL THE RAINFALL FALLING IN A WATERSHED TO A POINT IN A STREAM WE WOULD HAVE THE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION INPUT TO THAT POINT Page 19
POSSIBLE THROUGH THE BLACK- MAGIC OF GIS USING GIS HYDROLOGY TOOLS DEVELOPED DRAINAGE PATHWAYS FOR ALL OF THE STREAMS SUMMED UP THE AVERAGE ANNUAL RAINFALL FALLING IN THESE PATHWAYS RESULTS WERE AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION INPUT TO THE STREAM Page 20
FIRST STEP WAS TO APPLY WATERSHED FUNCTIONS TO A DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL USING GIS HYDROLOGY TOOLS FILLED SINKS IN DATA GUAM LIDAR DATA CREATED A FLOW DIRECTION GRID CREATED A CELL ACCUMULATION GRID WHICH DEFINED THE STREAM PATHWAYS Page 21
COMBINED THE FLOW DIRECTION GRID WITH THE PRECIPITATION GRID USING GIS HYDROLOGY TOOLS CREATED A WEIGHTED ACCUMULATION GRID BY SUMMING AVERAGE PRECIPITATION IN THE STREAM PATHS Page 22
RESULTS WAS THE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION INPUT ALONG THE STREAM PATHWAYS PRECIP INPUT 59.39 CFS-YR ALSO COMPUTED DRAINAGE AREAS ALONG ALL THE STREAMS NOTE: UNITS = AVERAGE ANNUAL FLOW IN CFS REQUIRED TO EQUAL THE POTENTIAL ANNUAL VOLUME OF RAINFALL FLOWING PAST THAT POINT IN ONE YEAR Page 23
COMPARED AVERAGE PRECIPITATION INPUT TO AVERAGE ANNUAL FLOW FROM GIS PRECIPITATION INPUT (CFS) AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) RUNOFF FACTOR DRAINAGE AREA (SQ. MILES) UMATAC 16.62 8.62 0.52 2.0686 IMONG 16.51 10.22 0.62 1.9058 PAGO 40.91 26.40 0.65 5.6726 YLIG 46.53 28.56 0.61 6.5128 FINILE 2.06 1.40 0.68 0.262 INARAJAN 33.46 17.46 0.52 4.321 TINAGO 14.73 5.73 0.39 1.9147 GUESS 7.08 3.02 0.43 0.925 UGUM NR TALOFOFO 59.39 29.77 0.50 7.0453 AAAAAAAAAAAAAA FFFFFFFF RRRRRRRRRRRR FFFFFFFFFFFF = PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP IIIIIIIIII Page 24
DEVELOPED AN AVERAGE FLOW VS PRECIPITATION INPUT RELATIONSHIP 35 GUAM RIVERS PRECIPITATION INPUT VS AVERAGE FLOW 1953-1982 DATA AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) AVERAGE FLOW (CFS) 30 25 20 15 10 5 y = 0.5152x R² = 0.9692 0 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION INPUT (CFS) AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION INPUT (CFS) PRECIPITATION INPUT (CFS) AAAAAAAAAAAAAA FFFFFFFF = 0.5152 XX AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAA PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP RR 2 =0.9692 Page 25
APPLIED THE GIS RASTER CALCULATOR TOOL TO COMPUTE AVERAGE FLOW AVERAGE FLOW 30.60 CFS AVERAGE FLOW COMPUTED FOR ALL POINTS ALONG ALL STREAMS AAAAAAAAAAAAAA FFFFFFFF = 0.5152 XX PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP IIIIIIIIII Page 26
USED RASTER CALCULATOR TOOL AGAIN TO COMPUTE FLOW DURATION VALUES ALONG THE STREAMS DURATION VALUES COMPUTED FOR ALL POINTS ALONG ALL STREAMS Page 27
FLOWS IDENTIFIED IN ALL STREAMS IN SOUTH GUAM Page 28
ROAD BRIDGE ISSUES ROAD FILL FILLED AREA ROAD FILL Page 29
ISSUES WITH GIS ACCUMULATION FUNCTION ELEVATION GRID FILE VERY LARGE THE ACCUMULATION FUNCTION WOULD NOT RUN TO COMPLETION WE RESAMPLED THE ELEVATION DATA GUAM LIDAR DATA 1M GRID 1.9 GB Page 30
SIMILAR STUDIES DONE FOR POHNPEI AND KOSRAE, FSM 2200 MILES ISLAND OF POHNPEI, FSM ISLAND OF KOSRAE, FSM Page 31
FOR MORE DETAILS SEE WERI TECHNICAL REPORTS http://www.weriguam.org/ Prediction of flow duration curves for use in hydropower analysis at ungaged sites in Pohnpei, FSM, Report #129, 2010. Prediction of flow duration curves for use in hydropower analysis at ungaged sites in Kosrae, FSM, Report #137, 2012. Prediction of Flow Duration Curves at Ungaged Sites on Guam Report #154, 2015. Page 32
GIS MAPS ON LINE DIGITAL ATLAS OF SOUTHERN GUAM http://south. hydroguam.net/ http://south.hydroguam.net/map-hydrology-drainage-streamflow.php Page 33
THANKS TO WERI and the USGS Water Institute Program that funded the project USGS Pacific Island Water Science center who with the support of WERI and the Government of Guam maintain the stream flow gaging net work in Guam Dr. Nathan Habana at WERI for keeping my ARCMAP GIS program updated and helping with the LIDAR Elevation Data All the Government of Guam Agencies who s forward thinking funded the development of the LIDAR Elevation data Page 34
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS Page 35