Geology topics

Matthew T. Whitehead

Publications and source records attributed to Matthew T. Whitehead.

12 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2024

Flood-inundation maps for the Cuyahoga River in and near Independence, Ohio, 2024

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 9.9-mile reach of the Cuyahoga River in and near Independence, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District Board of Trustees. Water-surface profiles were computed for the stream reach by using a one-dimensional steady-state step-backwater model. The model was calibrated to the current (2024) stage-streamflow relation (rating curve 43.0) for the USGS streamgage 04208000, Cuyahoga River at Independence, Ohio. The resulting hydraulic model was then used to compute 13 water-surface profiles for water levels (flood stages) ranging from 14.00 to 26.00 feet. The flood stages range from “action stage” to above “major flood stage” as reported by the National Weather Service. The simulated water-surface profiles were then used in combination with a digital elevation model derived from light detection and ranging data to map the inundated areas associated with each flood profile. The flood-inundation maps and the supporting hydraulic model produced by this study can be used by emergency managers and local officials to assess flood mitigation strategies and to define flood hazard areas to protect life and property, to coordinate flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, and to aid postflood recovery efforts.

Ohio↗

USGS2024

Flood-inundation maps for the Cuyahoga River at Jaite, Ohio, 2024

Digital flood-inundation maps for a nearly 6-mile reach of the Cuyahoga River at Jaite, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District Board of Trustees. The maps depict estimates of the extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at USGS streamgage 04206425 on the Cuyahoga River at Jaite, Ohio. Water-surface profiles were computed for the stream reach by using a one-dimensional steady-state step-backwater model. The hydraulic model was calibrated to the current USGS streamgage data and then used to compute 15 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from 6 to 20 feet, which correspond to below “action stage” to “major flood stage” as reported by the National Weather Service. The simulated water-surface profiles were then used with a geographic information system digital elevation model derived from light detection and ranging data to delineate the areas flooded at each stage. These maps, along with current stage data from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the National Weather Service, can provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for postflood recovery efforts.

Ohio↗

USGS2021

Assessment of runoff volume reduction associated with soil amendments added to portions of highway median-strip catchments in Ohio, 2018–20

The U.S. Geological Survey installed 10 rain gages and 12 calibrated H-flumes to measure rainfall and runoff volumes at 10 locations in Ohio Department of Transportation highway median-strip catchments. Data were collected to facilitate comparisons of rainfall and runoff volumes at study sites before and after stormwater best management practices (BMPs) were installed and between sites with different BMPs. The BMP treatments comprised removing the top layer of the existing soil, rototilling the remaining soil to a 6-inch depth, mixing the soils with one of two soil amendments (compost with sand or shale) at one of two thicknesses (4 inches or 6 inches), topping with a compost blanket, seeding, and installing erosion control matting. The overall treatment used at a given study site is referred to as “BMP.” At two locations where soil amendments were installed, a second “control” site was installed to measure runoff from an adjacent catchment in the same median strip where no soil amendment was installed. This no-treatment option (no soil amendment) was considered its own class of BMP. Rainfall and runoff data were collected during periods when air temperatures were above freezing (including all months except January, February, and parts of December and March) from 2018 to 2020. The data collection period for each study site was divided into “pre-BMP” and “post-BMP” periods. Equipment to measure rainfall and runoff was installed and data were collected from April to December 2018 before installation of soil amendments (the pre-BMP period). The post-BMP period started between April and May of 2019 at the first measured rainfall after soil amendments were installed. Rainfall and runoff monitoring continued through September 2020. For control sites, the post-BMP periods were assigned to start with the first measured rainfall in the 2019 data collection season. A rainfall-runoff “event” was defined as beginning at the time of the first measured rainfall and ending when rainfall and runoff (if any) ceased and remained ceased for at least 3 hours. A value referred to as “event runoff percentage,” defined as the total volume of runoff during an event expressed as a percentage of the total volume of rainfall falling over the catchment, was computed for each event. The distribution of rainfall totals associated with events was similar between the pre-BMP and post-BMP periods; however, there were appreciable between-site differences in the distribution of event runoff percentages during the pre-BMP and post-BMP periods. Empirical distribution function (EDF) tests were performed with and without data from events that resulted in no runoff to determine whether the distribution of event runoff percentages changed from the pre-BMP period to the post-BMP period. The null hypothesis that the EDFs of event runoff percentages were equal in the pre-BMP and post-BMP periods was rejected ( α =0.05) in at least one of the two tests for four sites (one site with a shale amendment and three sites with sand amendments). Mean event runoff percentages at each of those four sites decreased from the pre-BMP period to the post-BMP period. The null hypothesis that the EDFs of event runoff percentages were equal was not rejected for the other six sites’ draining catchments with soil amendments or the two control sites. EDF tests performed on event rainfall totals indicated no statistically significant changes between the pre-BMP and post-BMP period distributions for any of the sites. Double-mass analyses of cumulative runoff were performed for two pairs of closely spaced sites (each pair located in a common median strip): one site in each pair drained a catchment where soil amendments were installed, and the other (a control) drained a catchment without soil amendments. Those double-mass analyses indicated a small reduction in runoff from the pre-BMP to post-BMP period at the site whose catchment received the sand and compost amendment, but no perceptible reduction in runoff at the site whose catchment received the shale and compost amendment. Regression analyses indicated that (a) three rainfall factors (event rainfall totals, total rainfall for the previous 7 days, and a cross product of the factors) and the intercept term were the four most important factors explaining event runoff percentages, (b) the effect of amendment type on event runoff percentage was small in comparison to the rainfall and intercept terms, (c) event runoff percentages tended to be lower for sites with shale amendments than sites with sand amendments; however, event runoff percentages tended to be lower for control sites than for sites with shale or sand amendments, and (d) event runoff percentages increased with increasing amendment thickness. The counterintuitive results that event runoff percentages increased with increasing amendment thickness and that control sites tended to have lower event runoff percentages than sites draining soil-amended catchments likely reflects unmeasured factors that existed at the sites before BMPs were installed rather than the effect of the BMP treatments. Although not definitive, some support for the conclusion that the sand amendment was generally more effective at reducing runoff than the shale amendment was provided by results from the EDF tests, double-mass analyses, and runoff statistics.

Ohio↗

USGS2021

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses of the Grand River, Red Cedar River, and Sycamore Creek near Lansing, Michigan

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) completed hydrologic and hydraulic analyses for selected reaches of the Grand River, Red Cedar River, and Sycamore Creek near Lansing, Michigan, in cooperation with the city of Lansing. The study comprised a 3.1-mile reach of the Grand River, a 30.3-mile reach of the Red Cedar River, and a 12.0-mile reach of Sycamore Creek. The information produced from the study can be used to update and expand an existing Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Study for Ingham County, Mich. Historical streamflow data from USGS streamgages on Grand River at Lansing, Mich. (station number 04113000); Red Cedar River at East Lansing, Mich. (station number 04112500); Red Cedar River near Williamston, Mich. (station number 04111379); and Sycamore Creek at Holt Road near Holt, Mich. (station number 04112850) were used to estimate instantaneous peak streamflows for floods with 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, and 0.2-percent annual exceedance probabilities (AEPs) and a “1-percent plus” AEP. The Hydrologic Engineering Center’s River Analysis System step-backwater model was used to determine water-surface elevation profiles for the 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, and 0.2-percent AEP floods, the 1-percent plus AEP flood, and a regulatory floodway for each stream reach. The hydraulic models were calibrated based on stage-streamflow ratings at USGS streamgages. Flood-inundation boundaries for the 1- and 0.2-percent annual exceedance probability floods and regulatory floodway were created for each stream.

Michigan↗

USGS2020

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses of selected streams in Stark County, Ohio

To update and expand a part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Study, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District, and the Stark County Commissioners began a cooperative study. The study consisted of hydrologic and hydraulic analyses for selected reaches of 14 streams in Stark County, Ohio: Broad-Monter Creek, Chatham Ditch, East Branch Nimishillen Creek, Fairhope Ditch, Firestone Ditch, Hayden Ditch, Middle Branch Nimishillen Creek, Middle Branch Nimishillen Creek Tributary Number 1, Nimishillen Creek, Reemsnyder Ditch, Sherrick Run, unnamed stream, West Branch Nimishillen Creek, and Zimber Ditch. The study totaled nearly 50 miles of stream reaches. Instantaneous peak streamflows for floods with 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, and 0.2-percent and 1-percent plus annual exceedance probabilities were estimated using historical streamflow data from the streamgages Nimishillen Creek at North Industry, Ohio (U.S. Geological Survey station number 03118500), and Middle Branch Nimishillen Creek at Canton, Ohio (U.S. Geological Survey station number 03118000), regional flood regression equations, and streamflow urbanization techniques. The annual exceedance probability streamflows were then used in a Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis System step-backwater model to determine water-surface profiles, flood-inundation boundaries for the 10-, 4-, 2-, 1-, and 0.2-percent and 1-percent plus annual exceedance probability floods, and a regulatory floodway along a selected reach of each stream. Model input included DEM-derived cross sections supplemented with field surveys of open channel cross sections and hydraulic structures, field estimates of roughness values, and annual exceedance probability flood estimates from regional regression equations and historical streamflow data. Flood-inundation boundaries were mapped for the 1- and 0.2-percent annual exceedance probability floods and a regulatory floodway for each stream reach.

Ohio↗

USGS2019

Flood-inundation maps for Nimishillen Creek near North Industry, Ohio, 2019

Digital flood-inundation maps for a 4-mile reach of Nimishillen Creek near North Industry, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District, Ohio, and the Stark County Board of Commissioners. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping (FIM) Program website at https://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage on Nimishillen Creek at North Industry, Ohio (station number 03118500). Near-real-time stages at this streamgage can be obtained on the internet from the USGS National Water Information System at https://waterdata.usgs.gov/ or the National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at https://water.weather.gov/ahps/ , which also forecasts flood hydrographs at this site. Flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. The model was calibrated to the current stage-discharge relation at the streamgage on Nimishillen Creek at North Industry and documented high-water marks from the flood of January 12, 2017. The hydraulic model was then used to compute seven water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot (ft) intervals referenced to the streamgage datum and ranging from 8 to 14 ft, which is from “action stage” to above “major flood stage” as reported by the National Weather Service. The simulated water-surface profiles were then used in combination with a geographic information system (GIS) digital elevation model derived from light detection and ranging data to delineate the areas flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with internet information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgage and forecasted high-flow stages from the National Weather Service, will provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for postflood recovery efforts. Forecasts for the USGS streamgage on Nimishillen Creek at North Industry, Ohio are issued as needed during times of high water, but are not routinely available (National Weather Service, 2017).

Ohio↗

USGS2014

Flood-inundation maps and updated components for a flood-warning system or the City of Marietta, Ohio and selected communities along the Lower Muskingum River and Ohio River

Digital flood-inundation maps for lower reaches of the Muskingum River and a reach of the Ohio River in southeast Ohio were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District and the City of Marietta, Ohio. To complete the inundation maps, Ohio River and lower Muskingum River bathymetry was updated and two streamgages, one on the Ohio River upstream of Marietta near Sardis, Ohio, and one on the Muskingum River in Beverly, Ohio, were added as basic components of the flood-warning system. An updated hydraulic model component also led to the new flood-inundation maps. The maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ depict estimates of the areal extent of flooding corresponding to water levels (stages) at one or more of the following USGS streamgages: Muskingum River at McConnelsville, Ohio (03150000); Muskingum River at Beverly, Ohio (03150500); and Ohio River at Marietta, Ohio (03150700). The maps can be used in conjunction with National Weather Service flood-forecast data to show areas of estimated flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. Flood profiles for selected reaches were prepared by calibrating steady-state step-backwater models to selected streamgage rating curves. The step-backwater models were used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for up to 12 flood stages at a streamgage with corresponding stream-flows ranging from approximately the 10- to 0.2-percent chance annual-exceedance probabilities for each of the 3 streamgages that correspond to the flood-inundation maps. Additional hydraulic modeling was used to account for the effects of backwater from the Ohio River on water levels in the Muskingum River. The computed longitudinal profiles of flood levels were used with a Geographic Information System digital elevation model (derived from light detection and ranging) to delineate flood-inundation areas. Digital maps showing flood-inundation areas overlain on digital orthophotographs were prepared for the selected floods.

Ohio↗

USGS2011

Development of a flood-warning network and flood-inundation mapping for the Blanchard River in Ottawa, Ohio

Digital flood-inundation maps of the Blanchard River in Ottawa, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Village of Ottawa, Ohio. The maps, which correspond to water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage at Ottawa (USGS streamgage site number 04189260), were provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into a Web-based flood-warning Network that can be used in conjunction with NWS flood-forecast data to show areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. Flood profiles were computed by means of a step-backwater model calibrated to recent field measurements of streamflow. The step-backwater model was then used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for 12 flood stages with corresponding streamflows ranging from less than the 2-year and up to nearly the 500-year recurrence-interval flood. The computed flood profiles were used in combination with digital elevation data to delineate flood-inundation areas. Maps of the Village of Ottawa showing flood-inundation areas overlain on digital orthophotographs are presented for the selected floods. As part of this flood-warning network, the USGS upgraded one streamgage and added two new streamgages, one on the Blanchard River and one on Riley Creek, which is tributary to the Blanchard River. The streamgage sites were equipped with both satellite and telephone telemetry. The telephone telemetry provides dual functionality, allowing village officials and the public to monitor current stage conditions and enabling the streamgage to call village officials with automated warnings regarding flood stage and/or predetermined rates of stage increase. Data from the streamgages serve as a flood warning that emergency management personnel can use in conjunction with the flood-inundation maps by to determine a course of action when flooding is imminent.

Ohio↗

USGS2009

Development of a Flood-Warning System and Flood-Inundation Mapping for the Blanchard River in Findlay, Ohio

Digital flood-inundation maps of the Blanchard River in Findlay, Ohio, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the City of Findlay, Ohio. The maps, which correspond to water levels at the USGS streamgage at Findlay (04189000), were provided to the National Weather Service (NWS) for incorporation into a Web-based flood-warning system that can be used in conjunction with NWS flood-forecast data to show areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. The USGS reestablished one streamgage and added another on the Blanchard River upstream of Findlay. Additionally, the USGS established one streamgage each on Eagle and Lye Creeks, tributaries to the Blanchard River. The stream-gage sites were equipped with rain gages and multiple forms of telemetry. Data from these gages can be used by emergency management personnel to determine a course of action when flooding is imminent. Flood profiles computed by means of a step-backwater model were prepared and calibrated to a recent flood with a return period exceeding 100 years. The hydraulic model was then used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for 11 flood stages with corresponding streamflows ranging from approximately 2 to 100 years in recurrence interval. The simulated flood profiles were used in combination with digital elevation data to delineate the flood-inundation areas. Maps of Findlay showing flood-inundation areas overlain on digital orthophotographs are presented for the selected floods.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2003

Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analyses of Selected Streams in Lorain County, Ohio, 2003

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses were done for selected reaches of nine streams in Lorain County Ohio. To assess the alternatives for flood-damage mitigation, the Lorain County Engineer and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) initiated a cooperative study to investigate aspects of the hydrology and hydraulics of the nine streams. Historical streamflow data and regional regression equations were used to estimate instantaneous peak discharges for floods having recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 years. Explanatory variables used in the regression equations were drainage area, main-channel slope, and storage area. Drainage areas of the nine stream reaches studied ranged from 1.80 to 19.3 square miles. The step-backwater model HEC-RAS was used to determine water-surface-elevation profiles for the 10-year-recurrence-interval (10-year) flood along a selected reach of each stream. The water-surface pro-file information was used then to generate digital mapping of flood-plain boundaries. The analyses indicate that at the 10-year flood elevation, road overflow results at numerous hydraulic structures along the nine streams.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗

USGS2002

Techniques for estimating selected streamflow characteristics of rural, unregulated streams in Ohio

This report provides equations for estimating mean annual streamflow, mean monthly streamflows, harmonic mean streamflow, and streamflow quartiles (the 25th-, 50th-, and 75th-percentile streamflows) as a function of selected basin characteristics for rural, unregulated streams in Ohio. The equations were developed from streamflow statistics and basin-characteristics data for as many as 219 active or discontinued streamflow-gaging stations on rural, unregulated streams in Ohio with 10 or more years of homogenous daily streamflow record. Streamflow statistics and basin-characteristics data for the 219 stations are presented in this report. Simple equations (based on drainage area only) and best-fit equations (based on drainage area and at least two other basin characteristics) were developed by means of ordinary least-squares regression techniques. Application of the best-fit equations generally involves quantification of basin characteristics that require or are facilitated by use of a geographic information system. In contrast, the simple equations can be used with information that can be obtained without use of a geographic information system; however, the simple equations have larger prediction errors than the best-fit equations and exhibit geographic biases for most streamflow statistics. The best-fit equations should be used instead of the simple equations whenever possible.

Ohio↗

USGS1998

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses of selected streams in Erie County, Ohio

Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses were done for parts of Abel Ditch, Edson Creek, Maurer Ditch, and Sherod Creek 1 in northeastern Vermilion Township, Erie County, Ohio. For each stream, instantaneous peak discharges for floods having recurrence intervals of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 years were estimated using regional regression equations. Factors used in the regression equations were drainage area, a basin development factor, and average annual precipitation. Drainage areas at the selected stream locations ranged from 0.41 to 4.61 square miles. A step-backwater model was used to determine water-surface elevation profiles for the 10- year-recurrence-interval (10-year) flood along a selected reach of each stream. The water-surface profile information was then used to prepare a map of flood-plain boundaries. Hydraulic analyses indicated that the 10-year flood was generally confined within the stream channels. At three locations, however, some of the flood discharge escaped the main channel and flowed overland. In two cases, the overland flow returned to the channel from which it escaped. In the third case, flow drained into an adjacent basin. A separate analysis, in which concurrent flood peaks on the streams studied were assumed, indicated that water would spill over the Sherod Creek and the Maurer Ditch divides and that some of this water would eventually enter the Edson Creek Basin downstream from the study area. 1 Locally the upper reach of Sherod Creek, south of the Conrail Railroad, is known as Japson Ditch. However, for simplicity it will be referred to as Sherod Creek along its entirety.

Ohio↗