Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Charles R. Gamble

Publications and source records attributed to Charles R. Gamble.

12 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS1989

Flood of December 25, 1987, in Millington, Tennessee and vicinity

Intense rainfall totaling 9.2 in. in a 12-hour period on December 24-25, 1987, and 14.8 in for the period December 24-27 caused record floods in Millington, Tennessee and vicinity. The peak discharge of Big Creek at Raleigh-Millington Road was almost twice the discharge of the 100-year flood discharge and that of Loosahatchie River near Arlington was about equal to the 50-year flood discharge. The inundated area and flood elevations are depicted on a map of Millington, Tennessee and vicinity. Water surface profiles for the peak of December 25, 1987, for Loosahatchie River, Big Creek, Royster Creek, North Fork Creek, Casper Creek, and an unnamed tributary to Big Creek are shown. Flood damages and cleanup costs for this record flood have been estimated at about $9.2 million. (USGS)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1986

Flood of September 12-13, 1982 in Gibson, Carroll, and Madison Counties, western Tennessee

Intense rainfall on September 12-13, 1982, caused severe local flooding along many streams in Gibson County in western Tennessee. The rainfall resulted from remnants of Hurricane Chris combining with a cool front moving across the western half of the State. A maximum 1-hr rainfall intensity of 3.3 in was recorded at Humboldt. Peak discharge exceeded the 100-yr flood on many small streams. The floods caused three deaths and about 15.3 million dollars damage to crops, roads and bridges, businesses, and residential areas. Long-time residents of Gibson County reported that stream stages have not been as high since at least 1922. (USGS)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1983

Cane Creek flood-flow characteristics at State Route 30 near Spencer, Tennessee

The Tennessee Department of Transportation has constructed a new bridge and approaches on State Route 30 over Cane Creek near Spencer, Tennessee. The old bridge and its approaches were fairly low, permitting considerable flow over the road during high floods. The new bridge and its approaches are considerably higher, causing different flow conditions at the site. Analysis of the effects of the new bridge, as compared to the old bridge, on floods of the magnitude of the May 27, 1973, flood is presented. The May 27, 1973, flood was greater than a 100-year flood. Analysis of the 50- and 100-year floods for the new bridge are also presented. Results of the study indicate that the new construction will increase the water-surface elevation for a flood equal to the May 27, 1973, flood by approximately 1 foot upstream from bridge. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗
USGS1977

Technique for estimating depth of 100-year floods in Tennessee

Preface: A method is presented for estimating the depth of the loo-year flood in four hydrologic areas in Tennessee. Depths at 151 gaging stations on streams that were not significantly affected by man made changes were related to basin characteristics by multiple regression techniques. Equations derived from the analysis can be used to estimate the depth of the loo-year flood if the size of the drainage basin is known.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1973

Wolf River at Memphis, Tennessee: floodflow characteristics along proposed Interstate Highway 240, Shelby County

This report has been prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey at the request of Mr. Henry Derthick, Engineer of Structures of the Tennessee Department of Transportation, under the authority of a cooperative agreement between the two agencies. It supplements information contained in a report with the same title dated September 1966. The Department of Transportation proposes to construct a segment of Interstate Highway 240 and several bridges across the Wolf River on the northern side off Memphis, Shelby Count. Mt. Derthick has requested an analysis of the 50-year flood or the maximum flood of record to determine the possible effect of the proposed construction on flood profiles along the Wolf River.

Tennessee↗
USGS1965

Magnitude and frequency of floods in the United States, part 3–A. Ohio River Basin except Cumberland and Tennessee River Basins

This report presents a means of determining the probable magnitude and frequency of floods of any recurrence interval from 1.1 to 50 years at most points on streams in the Ohio River basin except Cumberland and Tennessee River basins. Curves are defined that show the relation between the drainage area and the mean annual flood in eight hydrologic areas, and composite frequency curves define the relation of a flood of any recurrence interval from 1.1 to 50 years to the mean annual flood. These two relations are based upon gaging-station records having 10 or more years of record not materially affected by storage or diversion, and the results obtainable from them will represent the magnitude and frequency of natural floods within the range and recurrence intervals defined by the base data. The report also contains a compilation of flood records at all sites in the area at which records have been collected for 5 or more consecutive years. As far as was possible at each location for which discharge has been determined, the tabulations include all floods above a selected base. Where only gage heights have been obtained or where the data did not warrant computation of peach discharges above a selected base, only annual peaks are shown. The maximum known flood discharges for the streamflow stations and miscellaneous points except Ohio River main stem stations, together with areal floods of 10- and 50-year recurrence intervals, are plotted against the size of drainage area for each flood region and hydrologic area to provide a convenient means of judging the frequency of the maximum known floods that have been recorded for these points.

Ohio River Basin↗
USGS1963

Tests of crest-stage gage intakes

Various types of c rest-stage gages have been used by the Geological Survey. Most installations consist of a vertically mounted metal pipe, a wooden rod, an intake device, and a small amount of granulated cork. These gages are placed where elevations of flood crests are desired. Water rising and then falling in the gage leaves a high-water mark of granulated cork on the wooden rod. The elevation of this mark can be determined at a date subsequent to the date of the crest. It has been found that the high-water mark left on the rod may not represent the true elevation of the flood crest in the stream at the gage site. The difference between the true elevation of the crest at the gage and the recorded elevation will be designated drawdown if the recorded elevation is less than the true elevation, or pileup if the recorded elevation is greater than the true elevation. Tests of drawdown and pileup effects have been made in the past by Survey personnel and others. (See p. 8.) These investigations have sometimes brought forth conflicting results, probably due to the varied conditions under which the gages were tested. The purpose of this investigation was (1) to determine the pileup and drawdown characteristics of the intakes now being used by the Survey and (2) to design a better intake if existing models were found unsuitable. It was further prescribed that any new design that might result should be easily fabricated from standard pipe fittings, and should be unaffected by pileup or drawdown in excess of 0.1 foot for velocities up to about 8 feet per second.

Open-File Report↗