Hydrologic Analysis for NPS 319 and CMI Grants
description
Transcript of Hydrologic Analysis for NPS 319 and CMI Grants
Hydrologic Analysis for NPS
319 and CMI Grants
Dave Fongers
Hydrologic Studies Unit
Land and Water Management Division
Overview Explanation of hydrology, morphology,
and stability concepts Importance of hydrologic analysis What is expected in a hydrologic report When are BMPs dealing with hydrology
required or encouraged Examples
Hydrology: the occurrence, distribution, and movement of water both on and under the earth's surface.
We will focus on surface runoff changes and the associated effects on streams.
Hydrologic Stability:Condition such that a drainage area maintains an identical response (runoff volume and peak flow) to an identical rainfall over a long time period. This is expected if the land uses, the soils, and the drainage characteristics within the watershed are not changing.
Development in a watershed can affect the flow regime - increasing total runoff volume and peak flows.
Development in a watershed can affect the flow regime - increasing total runoff volume and peak flows.
Hydrograph for a farm on sandy soil or woods on loamy soil.
Qp=23 cfs V=5 acre-ft.
Loss of infiltration due to development increases total runoff volume and peak flows.
Qp=23 cfs V=5 acre-ft.
Qp=65 cfs V=11 acre-ft.
Qp=90 cfs V=11 acre-ft.
Qp=65 cfs V=11 acre-ft.
Qp=23 cfs V=5 acre-ft.
More rapid runoff further increases peak flows.
The altered flow regime effects:
The altered flow regime effects: habitat (water velocity, temperature, sediment,
other pollutants)
The altered flow regime effects: habitat (water velocity, temperature, sediment,
other pollutants) flooding (frequency and elevation)
The altered flow regime effects: habitat (water velocity, temperature, sediment,
other pollutants) flooding (frequency and elevation) channel morphology
Channel Morphology: the stream’s form and structure:
planform (sinuosity): the shape or pattern of the river as seen from above
cross-section: the shape of the channel at a specific point profile: the slope of the channel, measured at the water
surface or the bottom of the thalweg, the "channel within the channel," that carries water during low flow conditions
cross-section planform
Morphologic or Channel Stability: conditions such that the stream's sinuosity, cross-sectional dimensions, and profile are constant. Because the stream is a dynamic system, this does not mean that the stream won’t move laterally over time, but only that it maintains its characteristics such as bankfull width and width/depth ratio.
This means:• no net change in channel shape and dimensions• stable flow regime, especially channel-forming flow
Channel-Forming Flow: a theoretical, constant discharge that would result in a channel morphology close to the existing channel.
Extreme flood flows generally have little effect on channel morphology because they are so rare. More frequently occurring flows, those with a 1.5 to 2 year recurrence interval, are generally the dominant channel-forming flows in stable, natural streams (Schueler, 1987 and Rosgen, 1996). Hydrologic changes that increase these flows can cause the stream to become unstable.
Stream Instability causes excessive erosion at many locations throughout a stream reach.
Causes of Streambank Erosion Unstable channel morphology
– A significant change in the hydrologic characteristics of the watershed
– A change in the stream form impacting adjacent portions of the stream, i.e. dredging, straightening
Natural river dynamics Large wave action An infrequent event, such as an ice jam or low
probability flood Concentrated runoff adjacent to the streambank Sparse plant cover due to too much foot traffic
Assessing Stream Stability
Stream stability must be assessed so that proposed solutions for erosion problems will:
address the cause be permanent not move an erosion problem to another
location
Stability Indicators Field observations
check for extensive erosion check for other causes of erosion (foot traffic, boat
wakes) compare historical to current land use anecdotal information
Comparison of aerial photos land use changes stream channel movement
Gage analysis Hydrologic study
Field Observationscheck for extensive erosion, other causes, compare land use, anecdotal information
Comparison of Aerial PhotographsLand use changes, stream channel movement
Gage Analysis1.5 Year Recurrence Flows
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
125%
150%
175%
200%
225%
1920's 1930's 1940's 1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's
Time (decade)
Pe
r c
en
t o
f 1
.5 y
ea
r fl
ow
s e
xp
ec
ted
Muskegon River,NewagoRiver Raisin,AdrianRiver Raisin,MonroeHuron River, Ann ArborAuSable River,Mio
What is a Hydrologic Study?Analysis of possible changes in the parameters that determine the volume, rate, and timing of surface runoff.
1. Estimate values for applicable parameters.
2. Calculate the impact of identified changes. Modeling and model calibration may be necessary.
3. Evaluate the meaning of the results.
Parameters That Affect Discharge Precipitation Ease of water
movement (time of concentration)
Watershed size (delineation)
Soils Land use
Antecedent moisture
Snow melt Frozen ground Spatial extent of
storm
Design Storm24 HourPrecipitationRainfall Frequency Atlas of
the Midwest, Bulletin 71, Midwestern Climate Center,
1992
Ease of Water MovementStorm sewers, pavement, graded lawns, and bare soils collect and convey water more rapidly.
Initial Delineation
Final Delineation~15% area increase
Delineation - Ryerson Creek
Soils - Ryerson Creek
Land Use - Ryerson Creek
Land use comparison
Ryerson Creek, Holland DrainCalculated Peak Flows (cfs)
1978 1997 Build-out50% (2-Year) 26 35 8410% (10-Year) 67 82 149
1% (100-Year) 143 164 250
Dramatic increases in runoff volume and peak flows are predicted for the upper watershed unless appropriate BMPs are used to compensate for continuing development.
Calculated Runoff Volumes (acre-feet)1978 1997 Build-out
50% (2-Year) 13 24 9410% (10-Year) 52 74 185
1% (100-Year) 137 176 335
Runoff AnalysisPurposes: To estimate changes in discharge
volumes, peaks, and timing due to changing hydrology
To estimate the effectiveness or size of added detention
Cannot demonstrate river stability, although may indicate instability
Runoff Calculation Tools Curve number and time of concentration methodology
– Developed in 1954 by the NRCS, it is the procedure most frequently used by hydrologists nationwide to estimate surface runoff from ungaged watersheds
– Soil type and land use are combined in a single parameter that indicates runoff potential
Rational method– widely used for small drainage areas (less than 100 acres)– Most appropriate for paved areas or watersheds with one
uniform land use HEC-HMS
– combines and routes discharges from multiple subbasins Many others
Site-Specific Data Needed: Soils Land use
– historical– current– possibly future
Energy slope and length of river reaches – can be estimated from USGS quadrangles
Detention– volumes– storage-discharge relationship
100-Year Storm at C&O, No Detention
Sample of model results.
100-Year Storm at C&O, No Detention compared to 2360 Acre-Feet of Detention
Sample of model results.
Unchanged hydrology– maintain and protect existing flow regime
Minor hydrologic change– restore previous flow regime
Past or ongoing change with morphology adapting– balance between improving flow regime and rehabilitating
morphology Ongoing significant change with morphology unstable
and restricted ability to adapt– maintain existing flow regime in future developments,
balance between improving flow regimes from developed sites and rehabilitating morphology
Using BMPs to offset hydrologic change
Examples
Pine River
Sometimes the cause of the erosion is obvious. No further analysis was needed in this case.
Schoolhouse Creek
This outlet of this detention pond did not detain water. No hydrologic study was required since the detention pond was sized for the development.
Plaster Creek
Additional detention was proposed for this site. Field observation indicated that land use had not changed in 22 years. No further hydrologic study was required.
Hager Creek
This unstable stream has extensive erosion all along the banks. The erosion is worse in some areas due to heavy foot traffic. A hydrologic study, incorporating modeling, was conducted to help select the appropriate rehabilitation BMPs.
Hager Creek
Pine River Tributary
This stream may be impacted by increased runoff from new development along the edge of a city, as well as loss of floodplain due to filling. Further hydrologic analysiswould be helpful to verify this.
Bear CreekThe property owner stated that 30 feet of stream bank has eroded. Anecdotal observations can be valuable.
Bear Creek
This erosion may be caused by flow diverting around debris or ice piling against the former bridge supports. Nearby streambanks are stable. Removal of the former bridge supports may eliminate the cause of the erosion at this site.
East Branch AuGres River
This erosion is caused by the diversion of approximately fourteen miles of natural stream through three miles of straight channel. A limited hydrologic study was conducted.
MDEQ Internet Resources• www.deq.state.mi.us/swq/nps/npshome.htm
– Nonpoint Program, SWQD
• www.deq.state.mi.us/lwm/water_mgmt/nps/index.htm
– Nonpoint Program Hydrologic Support, LWMD
• www.deq.state.mi.us/swq/nps/docs1/bmps.htm
– SWQD Guidebook of Best Management Practices for Michigan Watersheds. 1992. (Reprinted October 1998.)
• www.deq.state.mi.us/lwm/water_mgmt/gis/default.asp
– GIS Information, LWMD
• www.deq.state.mi.us/lwm/water_mgmt/Publications/reports.htm
– Stream Stability And Channel Forming Flows
– Computing Flood Discharges For Small Ungaged Watersheds
– Hydrologic Impacts Due to Development. Revised June 2001
– Stormwater Management Guidebook. March 1992
– Floodplain Management for Local Officials, Third Edition. August 1992