Rainfall-Runoff Modeling: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
[[Category:Flood Hydrology]] | |||
---- | ---- | ||
<!-- Delete any sections that are not necessary to your topic. Add pictures/sections as needed --> | <!-- Delete any sections that are not necessary to your topic. Add pictures/sections as needed --> | ||
[ | "Rainfall-runoff modeling can be used to simulate the processes involved with converting rainfall and/or [[snowmelt]] into a hydrograph representing the upper level or maximum flood runoff that a drainage basin might reasonably be expected to produce. The unit hydrograph approach is the basic tool or “model” to convert rainfall to runoff after abstracting suitable infiltration losses. However, it should be noted that there are a number of other techniques available for making this conversion, including highly complex computerized watershed models."<ref name="Reclamation">[[Flood Hydrology Manual| Flood Hydrology Manual (United States Bureau of Reclamation, 1989)]]</ref> | ||
"In 1932, Leroy K. Sherman initially proposed the unit hydrograph approach to convert rainfall occurring over a drainage basin to flood runoff from that basin. Sherman’s approach, which was formally presented in the April 7, 1932, issue of [[Engineering]] News Record, has undergone considerable refinement over the years. The advent of high speed electronic computers has led a number of hydrologists to devise approaches using complex watershed models, as alternatives to the unit hydrograph model, to predict a drainage basin’s runoff response to rainfall. Many of these watershed models are an appropriate basis for simulating a continuous series of runoff responses to normal [[precipitation]] events. However, in the Bureau of Reclamation’s application, the primary interest is in simulating a basin’s runoff response to extreme rainfall events. Because these complex watershed models generally require extensive calibration to adequately represent a drainage basin’s physical properties, considerable-effort must be expended in the field and office in acquisition of data relative to these properties. In the final analysis, the relative “goodness” of an approach is measured by how well that approach reproduces actual recorded flood events. Comparative studies have indicated that both approaches are able to satisfactorily reproduce these events with neither one being notably superior to the other. Accordingly, the Bureau has, over the years, retained the unit hydrograph approach because of its simplicity, reliability, and the relatively low costs associated with its application to flood [[hydrology]] studies."<ref name="Reclamation"/> | |||
==Required Data== | ==Required Data== | ||
* [[Watershed Delineation]] | * [[Watershed Delineation]] | ||
* [[Precipitation]] | * [[Precipitation Depth]] | ||
* [[Precipitation Temporal Distribution]] | |||
* [[Precipitation Spatial Distribution]] | |||
* [[Rainfall Losses]] | * [[Rainfall Losses]] | ||
* [[Unit Hydrograph]] | * [[Unit Hydrograph]] | ||
| Line 12: | Line 17: | ||
==Best Practices Resources== | ==Best Practices Resources== | ||
{{Document Icon}} [[ | {{Document Icon}} [[National Engineering Handbook: Chapter 4 - Storm Rainfall Depth and Distribution | National Engineering Handbook: Chapter 4 - Storm Rainfall Depth and Distribution, NRCS]] | ||
{{Document Icon}} [[Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects: Chapter 8- Determination of the Probable Maximum Flood|Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects: Chapter 8- Determination of the Probable Maximum Flood | {{Document Icon}} [[Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects: Chapter 8- Determination of the Probable Maximum Flood | Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects: Chapter 8- Determination of the Probable Maximum Flood, FERC]] | ||
{{Document Icon}} [[ | {{Document Icon}} [[Hydrologic Engineering Requirements for Reservoirs (EM 1110-2-1420) | Hydrologic Engineering Requirements for Reservoirs (EM 1110-2-1420), USACE]] | ||
{{Document Icon}} [[Flood Hydrology Manual|Flood Hydrology Manual | {{Document Icon}} [[Flood Hydrology Manual | Flood Hydrology Manual, USBR]] | ||
==Trainings== | ==Trainings== | ||
Latest revision as of 04:38, 21 July 2023
"Rainfall-runoff modeling can be used to simulate the processes involved with converting rainfall and/or snowmelt into a hydrograph representing the upper level or maximum flood runoff that a drainage basin might reasonably be expected to produce. The unit hydrograph approach is the basic tool or “model” to convert rainfall to runoff after abstracting suitable infiltration losses. However, it should be noted that there are a number of other techniques available for making this conversion, including highly complex computerized watershed models."[1]
"In 1932, Leroy K. Sherman initially proposed the unit hydrograph approach to convert rainfall occurring over a drainage basin to flood runoff from that basin. Sherman’s approach, which was formally presented in the April 7, 1932, issue of Engineering News Record, has undergone considerable refinement over the years. The advent of high speed electronic computers has led a number of hydrologists to devise approaches using complex watershed models, as alternatives to the unit hydrograph model, to predict a drainage basin’s runoff response to rainfall. Many of these watershed models are an appropriate basis for simulating a continuous series of runoff responses to normal precipitation events. However, in the Bureau of Reclamation’s application, the primary interest is in simulating a basin’s runoff response to extreme rainfall events. Because these complex watershed models generally require extensive calibration to adequately represent a drainage basin’s physical properties, considerable-effort must be expended in the field and office in acquisition of data relative to these properties. In the final analysis, the relative “goodness” of an approach is measured by how well that approach reproduces actual recorded flood events. Comparative studies have indicated that both approaches are able to satisfactorily reproduce these events with neither one being notably superior to the other. Accordingly, the Bureau has, over the years, retained the unit hydrograph approach because of its simplicity, reliability, and the relatively low costs associated with its application to flood hydrology studies."[1]
Required Data
- Watershed Delineation
- Precipitation Depth
- Precipitation Temporal Distribution
- Precipitation Spatial Distribution
- Rainfall Losses
- Unit Hydrograph
- Reach Routing
Best Practices Resources
National Engineering Handbook: Chapter 4 - Storm Rainfall Depth and Distribution, NRCS
Hydrologic Engineering Requirements for Reservoirs (EM 1110-2-1420), USACE
Trainings
On-Demand Webinar: Introduction to Hydrologic Modeling Using Geospatial Information
Citations:
Revision ID: 7351
Revision Date: 07/21/2023