Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70028101

Instantaneous unit hydrograph evaluation for rainfall-runoff modeling of small watersheds in North and South Central Texas

T.G. Cleveland·X. He·W.H. Asquith·X. Fang·D.B. Thompson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Data from over 1,600 storms at 91 stations in Texas are analyzed to evaluate an instantaneous unit hydrograph (IUH) model for rainfall-runoff models. The model is fit to observed data using two different merit functions: a sum of squared errors function, and an absolute error at the peak discharge time (QpMAX) function. The model is compared to two other models using several criteria. Analysis suggests that the Natural Resources Conservation Service Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph, Commons' Texas hydrograph, and the Rayleigh IUH perform similarly. As the NRCS and Commons' models are tabulations, the Rayleigh model is an adequate substitute when a continuous model is necessary. The adjustable shape parameter in the Rayleigh model does not make any dramatic improvement in overall performance for these data, thus fixed shape hydrographs are adequate for these watersheds. ?? 2006 ASCE.

Explore related subjects

Journal of Irrigation and Drainage EngineeringArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T.G. Cleveland, X. He, W.H. Asquith, X. Fang, D.B. Thompson. 2006. Instantaneous unit hydrograph evaluation for rainfall-runoff modeling of small watersheds in North and South Central Texas. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9437(2006)132%3A5(479)

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2018

GIS-based method for estimating surficial groundwater levels in coastal Virginia using limited information

In many coastal areas, high water tables are present, complicating installation of some stormwater best management practices (BMPs) that rely on infiltration. Regional estimates of the seasonal high water table (SHWT) often rely on sources such as soil surveys taken over a decade ago; these data are static and do not account for groundwater withdrawals or other anthropogenic impacts. To improve estimates of the SHWT, we developed a GIS-based methodology relying on surface water elevations. Data sources included a 1.5-m (5.0 ft) resolution Lidar-derived digital elevation model (DEM), aerial imagery, and publicly available shapefiles of water boundaries. Twenty-six groundwater monitoring wells were screened to eliminate well locations influenced by pumping, yielding 22 wells. In coastal Virginia, tidal water bodies and ditches form terminal boundaries for discharge from the water-table aquifers and permit water table elevations to be fixed at the landward boundaries of surface water bodies. Water table elevations interpolated from well data and boundary elevations were used to create a triangulated irregular network representing the water table elevations for November 2012, which was the date of the DEM. An adjustment factor, calculated from the highest recorded April water table depth from long-term groundwater monitoring data, was added to estimate the SHWT elevation. SHWT elevations were subtracted from the DEM to yield SHWT depth, which was compared with long-term monitoring well data, yielding an R2 value of 0.91. Residual errors were random, although the method underpredicted the highest expected SHWT and overpredicted the median SHWT. The SHWT depth map was validated by using water table depths from 57 soil borings at 10 different sites, and consistently matched observations better than available soil survey estimates. The SHWT depth map could be useful for BMP siting and feasibility studies in similar hydrogeological settings.

Virginia↗
USGS2013

Return period adjustment for runoff coefficients based on analysis in undeveloped Texas watersheds

The rational method for peak discharge (Q p ) estimation was introduced in the 1880s. The runoff coefficient (C) is a key parameter for the rational method that has an implicit meaning of rate proportionality, and the C has been declared a function of the annual return period by various researchers. Rate-based runoff coefficients as a function of the return period, C(T), were determined for 36 undeveloped watersheds in Texas using peak discharge frequency from previously published regional regression equations and rainfall intensity frequency for return periods T of 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 years. The C(T) values and return period adjustments C(T)/C(T=10 year) determined in this study are most applicable to undeveloped watersheds. The return period adjustments determined for the Texas watersheds in this study and those extracted from prior studies of non-Texas data exceed values from well-known literature such as design manuals and textbooks. Most importantly, the return period adjustments exceed values currently recognized in Texas Department of Transportation design guidance when T>10 years.

Texas↗
USGS2011

Estimation of volumetric runoff coefficients for Texas watersheds using land-use and rainfall-runoff data

The rational method for peak discharge ( Q p "> Q p ) estimation was introduced in the 1880s. Although the rational method is considered simplistic, it remains an effective method for estimating peak discharge for small watersheds. The runoff coefficient ( C "> C ) is a key parameter for the rational method and can be estimated in various ways. Literature-based C "> C values ( C lit "> C lit ) are listed for different land-use/land cover (two words, no hyphen) (LULC) conditions in various design manuals and textbooks; however, these C lit "> C lit values were developed with little basis on observed rainfall and runoff data. In this paper, C lit "> C lit values were derived for 90 watersheds in Texas by using LULC data for 1992 and 2001; the C lit "> C lit values derived from the two data sets were essentially the same. Also for this study, volumetric runoff coefficients ( C v "> C v ) were estimated by using observed rainfall and runoff depths from more than 1,600 events observed in the watersheds. Watershed-median and watershed-average C v "> C v values were computed, and both are consistent with data from the National Urban Runoff Program. In addition, C v "> C v values were estimated by using rank-ordered pairs of rainfall and runoff depths (i.e., frequency matching). As anticipated, C "> C values derived by all three methods (literature based, event totals, and frequency matching) consistently had larger values for developed watersheds than for undeveloped watersheds. Two regression equations of C v "> C v versus percent impervious area were developed and combined into a single equation that can be used to rapidly estimate C v "> C v values for similar Texas watersheds.

Texas↗