Hydrologic modeling and calculations using HEC-HMS and HEC-GeoHMS for the 100-year storm for Sanderson, Texas.UT-AustinCivil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineerin

Somos-Valenzuela, Marcelo

English

Texas ScholarWorks

    THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN      Floodplain Analysis of Sanderson, Texas – HEC-HMS Surface Hydrology spring 2010       Marcelo Somos-Valenzuela  May 07, 2010                  CE 394K.2 Surface Hydrology Dr. David Maidment Spring 2010    1  Table of contents. 1. Introduction 2 2. Field Trip to Sanderson 3 3. Objectives 4 4. Methods 5 4.1. HEC-GeoHMS preprocessing 5 4.2. Routing methods 10 4.3. Design Storm 12 4.4. Calibration of the HEC-HMS model 16 4.5. Effect of the dams in the hydrologic model 17 5. Conclusions 19 6. References 19    2  1. Introduction Sanderson city is located in Terrell County; it is on U.S. Highway 90 in Sanderson Canyon in the southwest part of the county. On June 11, 1965, Sanderson was devastated by a flash flood. A wall of water roared down Sanderson Canyon into Sanderson destroying numerous homes and businesses. More than twenty people died in the flood. As a consequence of the flood 11 dams (Figure 1) were built [4] in order to avoid new catastrophes. The objective of this project is to take the efforts which have been already done in order to update the Sanderson floodplain map. Specifically, the water surface elevations computed in that study need to be laid out on up to date digital terrain data so that the extent of inundation during the 100-year flood can be mapped out properly. In order to achieve this objective a group composed of four people has been formed; each one of the integrants works in a different part of this project. In this particular case, the hydrology calculation and modeling is presented. The main objective of the hydrology work is to estimate the peak outflow of the basin for a storm of 100 years. For that purpose the software HEC-GeoHMS and HEC-HMS are used. The storm is going to be calibrated with the storm calculated by a professional of the U.S. Geological Survey in Lubbock, Texas, he used two regression methods developed by personnel of USGS. The points of interest in this study are the outlet of the dams 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, called site 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 respectively; the town of Sanderson, the USGS gage station and the bridge just before the area in which the lagoons are located.   Figure 1: Location of the Dams in Sanderson Texas.2. Field Trip to SandersonDuring spring break a group of stEWRE in UT Austin and a professional specialist in flood mappingwent to Sanderson to make a scoping process in order to get a better idea of the local situation and how through this activity the project could be delineated. Among the different acdeveloped in that place, one of the most important was the meeting with survivors of the catastrophe in 1965. They related the impact of that event on their livesimportance of our role in this project. NRCS office. Finally, the group went to take a look were flooded in 1965.       udents involved in this project, Dr David Maidment from , Glen Wright, and made us realize the Also the group got acquainted with Sanderson’at some of the dams and some places which 3   from AECOM tivities s USDA- Figure 3: Principal outlet of the dam located in the site #11 As a consequence of the field trip work has been delineated by Dr David Maidment. The terrain processing is responsibility of Laura Hurd; the hydrological modeling is responsibility of Marcelo Somos; the dams answer to a flood event, including the discharge curve of the dams is Cody HudsonHEC-RAS processing is responsibility of 3. Objectives   Determine the 100 year Determine which storm duration gives the  Calibrate the 100 year Estimate the 2, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 500simulation model.   the group has a better idea about the project. The ’s work; and finally the Rachel Chisholm.   flood for 24 hours and 6 hours design storm duration.highest peak flow.  flood with the USGS regression curve result year floods including the dams in the 4    s.  4. Methods As it was mentioned before the floodplain analysis of Sanderson has been students. The results of two of thesimulation and the results of the hydrology simulation are the input calculation of the flood zone and mapping of the flood zone. The inputs are the terrain information which was obtained from a DEM with 10 mHydro in the ArcGIS software (for more references see Laucurves for the 11 dams analyzed in this study, those curvesite (for more references see Cody Hudson report).4.1. HEC-GeoHMS preprocessingHEC-GeoHMS is software developed by the US Armhas been developed for engineers and hydrologistGeoHMS it is possible to delineateinformation for different shapefileHMS. HEC-GeoHMS is a spatial extension of HECHMS. The DEM previously processed work done in this software can be divided in 4 parts: parameter, hydrologic parameters and Below is a description of the made students have been used as inputs of the hydrology for the last p resolution and analyzed with the tool Arc ra Hurd report) and the discharge s were developed in a software called   y Corps of Engineering. This software s with limited experience in GIS [ watersheds, streams.  It is also can extract and calculate s, and so on, in order to create a hydrological model in HEC-HMS, so its outputs are compatible with for the Sanderson basin was used as input of GeoHMS. The basin processing, define physical file exportation to HMS (Figure 2). Figure 2: HEC-GeoHMS tools. HEC-GeoHMS processing. 5  by four art which is the 7]. In -   Basin Processing: In this part of the project the concept applied.  Figure 3 showthis project there are ten points of interest so it is necessary to delineated at least one outlet for all of them.ArcHydro and with this and run the softwareprocessing tool (FigureFigure 3: Geo processing resulted from the use of ArcHydro toolbox in ArcGIS.of less is more s a shape file of the watershed delineated in ArcHydro. In   Figure 3 shows the quantity of catchments many catchments it is impossible to analyze the watershed  without many difficulties. In order to fix that the Basin  4) was used to obtain a result that is shown Figure 4: Basin processing tools.   6 was generated by  in Figure 5.    Figure  Define physical paramecalculating parameters which depend onFor this study the River length, slope, centroid, centroid elevation atools (Figure7). Thosparameters. Figure 6: Basin characteristics tools.5: Watershed after the Basin processing. ter: This set of tools (Figure 6) is really useful when  the information contained by the DEM. basin slope, longest flow path, nd centroidal flow path were calculated with those e parameters are fundamental for calculating the Hydrological   7  basin  Figure 7: Watershed after the basin characteristics. Hydrologic parameters:the user the option DEM information. As moreGeoHMS, less information will be needed in HMS. Figure 8 the HMS processes selection is shownsub basin was used. Ththe users don’t need to fill Figure  One of the main advantages of using GeoHMS ito determine hydrological parameters automatically w information contained in the model develops in In that case, for example. Also the CN lag method for the at information is exported later in a file readable by HMS so those fields in again.      8: Hydrological parameter tools. 8  s it gives ith the , in   Exportation to HMS: GeoHMS. The software checkconnectivity of the streams. Also the software gives in HMS (Figure 10). If everything is correct with the command Basin Filepossible to export the file toFigure 10: Watershed ready to be exported to HMS.In this project a small review of HECeasy to understand and has a huge quantity of application examplessee the manual. It could be downloaded from this http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hecThis is the last set of tools (Figure 9) that weres if the watershed was well delineated, especially the the scheme of the future model  HMS.  Figure 9: HMS set tools.  -GeoHMS was done. The manual of this software . Hence for more details website -geohms/download.html. 9  used in , it is now  is  4.2. Routing methods  Basin Lag Time In order to calculate the basin lag time(Figure 8). The method is described in Figure 11. The important aspect of this method is is a function of the length of the riversinformation using HEC-GeoHMS, and the curve number (CN). There are a lot of unrelated with the value of the CN. Inused [5]. Lately some studies came out recommend subtracting 20 from the CN will be use in the calibration process. Figure 11: Lag time of the basin as a function of the river lengthHydrology book).   , the CN lag method was used from HEC and basin slope which are calculated from terrain digital  a study developed by NRCS in 1981 the number 74 was with the CN for west Texas less than 74.the original value [6] for west Texas. In this study the value of  , slope and the CN10 -GeoHMS that it certainties  They   (Applied 11   River routing method The Muskingum method is used for calculating the relationship storage-outflow in the river. This method is described in the book Applied Hydrology [3]. Basically the model resolves Equation 1 (8.4.6 in Applied Hydrology [3]).    Equation 1 Where: Qj+1 : outflow at the time on analysis. Ij+1   : inflow at the time on analysis. Ij     : inflow at the step just before to the step on analysis. Qj   : inflow at the step just before to the step on analysis. C1, C2 and C3 are showed in equation 2, 3, 4 respectively.    Equation 2    Equation 3    Equation 4 Where: K =Lengh of the reachVelocity  [Hours] X = 0.2 and  ∆t = time step of the simulation, in this case it will be 15 minutes.  In this model a velocity of 2.5 m smade by NRCS in 1981 [5]. In that study velocities fFor more details about the method and how it could be implemented see references [4.3. Design Storm For the precipitation model the SCS rainfall distributions are going to be used. FoCounty the 100 year precipitation for 24 hours duration is 7.12 inches and for 6 hours duration is 5.36 inches (http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/hyd/p24lkup.xlsfactors are showed in Table 1. Storm type II correspond to the west part of Texas (Figure 1Table 1: SCS rainfall distributions factors-1 will be used. That number was come out from the study rom 9.6 to 17.2 feet per second were used. ). The distribution  12 3] and [8]. r Terrell 2)   Figure 12: Rainfall distribution.With the values of the design storm type II the graphic shows in Figure 1Figure 13: SCS design storms’ hyetographs.The Hyetographs from Figure 10.001.002.003.004.005.006.007.008.000Rainfall depth (in) precipitation mentioned and the factors from Table 13 was made.  3 were introduced in HEC-HMS model (Figure 110 20 30Time (hours)SCS design Storm100 years storm 24 hours duration100 year storm, 6 hours duration13   for a  4)   Figure 14: Meteorological model for 100 years storms for 24 and 6 hours duration.The HMS model indicated that just before 43212 CFS for a 6 hours duration storm and 34818 CFS for 6 hours duration storm gives a highest peak outflow for this calculated using 67 as the CN. Different CN were plugged conclusion. the Sanderson watershed (Figure 5) the outflow is a 24 hours duration storm. Hence basin. Those numbers were into the model getting the same 14   a  Figure 15: Peak outflow for both At that point is known that the storm design for 6 hours duration gives the highest peak outflow. Hence the design stormcalculated for 6 hours duration as wellFigure 16: SCS design storm, 6 hours duration.0123456780 1 2Rainfall depth (in)SCS design storm, 6 hours duration6 hours duration and 24 hours duration storm designs for return periods of 2, 10, 25, 50 and 500 years will be . The results are showed in Figure 16.  3 4 5 6 7Time (hours)15  .  500 years storm 100 year storm50 years storm25 years storm 10 years storm2 years storm 4.4. Calibration of the HECWilliam H. Asquith (Ph.D., P.G.Texas) estimated the runoff for Sanderson Creek which He based his calculation on two regression equations. The regression equation methods are:Alternative regression equations for estimation of annual peakundeveloped watersheds in Texas using PRESSequations for estimation of annual peakTexas using an L-moment-based, PRESDr Asquith results are summarized in Figure 1Figure 17: Regression equation results for Sanderson Canyon.The HEC-HMS model for the 100 years design storm for 6 hours duration was calibrated changing the CN. Different curve numbers were used from 54 to 74. The CN which gives the best approximation for the 100 years runoff (Figure 1-HMS model  Research Hydrologist U.S. Geological Survey, Lubbock, will be used for the calibration process-streamflow frequency for -minimization method [1] and Regression -stream flow frequency for undeveloped watersheds in S-minimized, residual-adjusted approach method7.  7) is 67. The runoff obtained with this CN is 16 .   [2].   43212 CFS which for this simulation is considered acceptable in comparison with 43138 CFS from the regression equation. 4.5. Effect of the dams in the hydrologic modelSince in point 4.3 it was estimated that a 6outflow than a 24-hours duration this model is 67, the HEC-HMS modelsoftware it is really easy to include the the watershed W9 has the outlet 9 as a downstof Figure 19 W9, it has the reservoir9 as outlet9 as downstream element. Figure18: Example of the HEC model with dams and without in watershed W9The input of the reservoir elements figure 19. Those curves were calcula  -hours duration design storm givedesign storm, also in point 4.2 it was estimated that the CN for  is ready for including the dams elements dams; one example is shown in Figure 1ream outlet. On the other hand oa downstream element and the reservoir9 has the are the storage-discharge curves as it is pointed ted by Cody Hudson. 17 s a higher peak in it. In HMS 8. In the left side n the right side   out in  Figure 19: Example of a storage discharge curve.Once the 11 dams were included in the HMS model, the storms with different return periods weTable2: Result for the 6 hours duration design storms with different return periodsIt is good to mention that those results correspond to the point in which the Sanderson watershed intercepts the Sanderson creek upstream to HEC-HMS gives a lot of information about every elementThat information has been given to Rachel using HEC-GeoRAS and HEC-RAS.    outflow for 6 hours duration design re calculated. The results are presented in Tabletown of Sanderson (Figure 5).  which is not included in this reportChisolm in order to calculate the inundation zone  18  2.    . 19  5. Conclusions   The 6 hours duration design storm gives a higher peak outflow than 24 hours duration design storm.  As a result of the calibration the CN used in the simulation has a value of 67.  The peaks outflow for 6 hours duration design storms with return period of 2, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 500 are 2904, 8717, 11363, 13220, 16043 and 26730 CFS respectively. 6. References [1] Asquith, W.H., and Thompson, D.B., 2008, Alternative regression equations for estimation of annual peak-stream flow frequency for undeveloped watersheds in Texas using PRESS-minimization: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008--5084, 40 p. \url{http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5084} [2] Asquith, W.H., and Roussel, M.C., 2009, Regression equations for estimation of annual peak-stream flow frequency for undeveloped watersheds in Texas using an L-moment-based, PRESS-minimized, residual-adjusted approach: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5087, 48 p. \url{http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5087} [3] Chow, Maidment and Mays (1988). Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill. [4] Handbook of TX online (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/SS/hjs7.html) [5] NRCS (1981). Re-evaluation of the Sanderson flood study.  [6] Thompson, David, Harle, H., Keister, H., McLendon, D., and Sandrana, S. (2004). Climatic Adjustments of Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Runoff Curve 20  Numbers: Findings and Recommendations. Texas Tech University Center for Multidisciplinary Research in Transportation. Project Summary Report 0-2104-S.  [7] US Army Corps of Engineers (2009). HEC-GeoHMS user’s manual. Hydrologic engineering center, HEC [8] US Army Corps of Engineers (2009) HEC-HMS user’s manual. Hydrologic engineering center, HEC  

Floodplain Analysis of Sanderson Texas - HEC-HMS

https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/2152/7858/2/Sanderson_Hydrology.pdf

Floodplain Analysis of Sanderson Texas - HEC-HMS

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Texas ScholarWorks