Effects of Rain Water Harvesting on the Hydrograph Tyler Jantzen May 3, 2007 CE 394K.2.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tom Craven Matt Simon Anne Trainor.  Construct a RHESSys ecohydrologic model for Sandhills Region.
Advertisements

Snapshot of Northeast Ohio Environment. Overview Topography Watersheds Parks and Conservation Areas Land Cover (developed areas, forests, wetlands, agriculture)
URBAN FLOOD MODELING Concepts & Models. 2 Different Approaches For Modeling an Urban Flood Hydrological Approach Objective is to generate a storm hydrograph.
Runoff Estimation, and Surface Erosion and Control Ali Fares, PhD NREM 600, Evaluation of Natural Resources Management.
Runoff Processes Daene C. McKinney
Hydrological Modeling for Upper Chao Phraya Basin Using HEC-HMS UNDP/ADAPT Asia-Pacific First Regional Training Workshop Assessing Costs and Benefits of.
DETERMINING LAND DEVELOPMENT EFFECT ON SURFACE RUNOFF USING GIS.
Forest Hydrology: Lect. 18
Hydrologic Simulation Models
Runoff Processes Reading: Applied Hydrology Sections 5.6 to 5.8 and Chapter 6 for Thursday.
Wake County Stormwater Workshop Guidance on the New Stormwater Ordinance and Design Manual August 29, 2006.
Surface Water Transport and Groundwater Infiltration Comparing Characteristics of Post Reclamation Channels with Preexisting Channels Presented by: Kirsty.
Continuous Hydrologic Simulation of Johnson Creek Basin and Assuming Watershed Stationarity Rick Shimota, P.E. Hans Hadley, P.E., P.G. The Oregon Water.
Excess Rainfall Reading for today’s material: Sections Slides prepared by V.M. Merwade Quote for today (contributed by Tyler Jantzen) "How many.
Upper Brushy Creek Flood Study – Flood mapping and management Rainfall depths were derived using USGS SIR , Atlas of Depth Duration Frequency.
53rd ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ARIZONA-NEVADA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA TUCSON, AZ APRIL 4, rd ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ARIZONA-NEVADA ACADEMY.
CURVE NO. DEVELOPMENT STEP 8 Soils data, land use data, watershed data, and CN lookup table are used to develop curve numbers for use in the SCS Curve.
PrePro2004: Comparison with Standard Hydrologic Modeling Procedures Rebecca Riggs April 29, 2005.
Development of a Hydrologic Model and Estimation of its Parameters Francisco Olivera, Ph.D., P.E. Department of Civil Engineering Texas A&M University.
By Jennifer VerWest. Differences between Flat and Average/Steep Terrain Flat Terrain Steep/Average Terrain.
Importance of Spatial Distribution in Small Watersheds Francisco Olivera, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Professor Huidae Cho Graduate Research Assistant Zachry.
Calculation of Hydrologic Parameters Using CRWR-PrePro Francisco Olivera, PhD Center for Research in Water Resources University of Texas at Austin.
Texas A&M University Department of Civil Engineering Cven689 – CE Applications of GIS Instructor: Dr. Francisco Olivera Logan Burton April 29, 2003 Application.
Urban Storm-Water Management Plan Utilizing Arc View and HEC-HMS College Station, Texas Kara Corcoran CVEN 689.
Bernie Engel Purdue University. Low-Impact Development (LID) An approach to land development to mimic the pre-development site hydrology to: 1)Reduce.
TR-55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
Copyright [insert date set by system] by [CH2M HILL entity] Company Confidential Hydrologic Evaluation of the Little Thompson River Phase 2: Little Thompson.
Mokelumne Avoided Cost Analysis Technical Committee Meeting: GeoWEPP modeling 1/9/2013 Mary Ellen Miller Michigan Tech Research Institute Bill Elliot,
NATHAN FOSTER WARM SEASON WORKSHOP 5/2/12 The Flash Flood Potential Index (FFPI) Project at BTV.
Water Quality and Development in Hill Country
Introduction to HEC-HMS
HEC-HMS Runoff Computation.
Presented by George Doubleday 1. What is The Woodlands Purpose of this Research Build and Calibrate Vflo TM model for The Woodlands Compare storms with.
Stormwater Management: TCNJ Townhouses South
Sarah Giles Holly Kuestner Steven Orr Qi Zhang. 1.Impervious Surfaces’ Effects on Flow Accumulation (Holly) 2.Variable Source Area (Holly) 3.Catchment.
Bernie Engel, Larry Theller, James Hunter Purdue University.
DIGITAL ELEVATION MODELING GEOG 421: DR. SHUNFU HU, SIUE Project One Steve Klaas Fall 2013.
CRWR-PrePro Calculation of Hydrologic Parameters Francisco Olivera, Ph.D. Center for Research in Water Resources University of Texas at Austin Texas Department.
The Effects of Vegetation Loss on the Two Elk Creek Watershed as a Result of the Proposed Vail Category III Ski Area Development CE 394 K.2 By Dave Anderson.
WinTR-20 SensitivityFebruary WinTR-20 Sensitivity to Input Parameters.
Description of WMS Watershed Modeling System. What Model Does Integrates GIS and hydrologic models Uses digital terrain data to define watershed and sub.
Long Valley Creek: A Rainfall-Runoff Modeling Story Rob Thompson Hydrologist U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District
CE 3354 Engineering Hydrology Lecture 9: Rational Equation Method Introduction to HEC-HMS.
Hydrologic Objects for Modeling: One Viewpoint Thomas A. Evans US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center.
Waller Creek Sub-basin HMS Review Original project idea scrapped Difficult to find adequate GIS data No measured flow data to validate model results.
Hydrological impacts of climate change over the contiguous United States: Project overview.
The Effects of Impervious Cover on a Hydrologic System BRUSHY CREEK WATERSHED By Ruth Haberman.
Hurricane Irene in Connecticut River Milena Spirova CE 394 K 2015.
Rainfall and Runoff Reading: Haested Section 2.4 Computing Hydrographs.
Bernie Engel, Larry Theller, James Hunter
BUILDING AND RUNNING THE HYDROLOGICAL MODEL
Innovation Through GIS
Lauren Schneider CE394K.2 Surface Water Hydrology Dr. Maidment 4/28/05
L-THIA Online and LID in a watershed investigation
L-THIA Online and LID Larry Theller
Prepared by: Sulyman Khraishe Madhat Z
Best Management Practices Implemented in Lower Bear River
Hydrologic Simulation Models
Hydrologic Analysis of the Hyrum Reservoir watershed
Regional Hydraulic Model for the City of Austin
Applications of Unit Hydrographs
Provo River Watershed Modeling with WMS Ryan Murdock.
SCS Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph
SCS Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph
Manoa Watershed Runoff
Floods and Flood Routing
Flooding in Flathead County and Kalispell, MT
Rainfall Runoff in the Guadalupe River Basin
Preciptation.
CRWR-PrePro Calculation of Hydrologic Parameters
Presentation transcript:

Effects of Rain Water Harvesting on the Hydrograph Tyler Jantzen May 3, 2007 CE 394K.2

Introduction What is Rain Water Harvesting (RWH)? What is Rain Water Harvesting (RWH)? Collect rain water for consumptive use Collect rain water for consumptive use Increasing popularity Increasing popularity Third world Third world Arid climates Arid climates “sustainable” building “sustainable” building

Introduction Advantages Advantages Reduce need for expensive infrastructure Reduce need for expensive infrastructure Reduce dependence on aquifer use Reduce dependence on aquifer use Clean, pH neutral Clean, pH neutral Reduce utility bills Reduce utility bills Reduce urban effects on hydrograph Reduce urban effects on hydrograph Disadvantages Disadvantages High fixed costs Reduce hydrograph below natural levels

Objectives Hydrologic Model to simulate Rain Water Harvesting Hydrologic Model to simulate Rain Water Harvesting Urban area Urban area Arid climate Arid climate Use ArcGIS, HEC-GeoHMS, HEC-HMS Use ArcGIS, HEC-GeoHMS, HEC-HMS Multiple Scenarios Multiple Scenarios Pre-developed Rain Water Harvesting 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% participation At what % does rain water harvesting = pre- developed? At what % does rain water harvesting = pre- developed?

Study Area: Rillito and Alamo Canyon Watersheds- Tucson, AZ Rillito River Watershed too big! Processing time too long.

Data Collection Basin delineation Basin delineation NHDPlus NHDPlus National Elevation Dataset (NED) DEM from USGS National Elevation Dataset (NED) DEM from USGS Curve Number grid creation Curve Number grid creation Soil parameters Soil parameters SSURGO from USDA SSURGO from USDA Land Use Land Use National Land Cover Dataset National Land Cover Dataset

Data Pre-Processing Land Use Land Use Re-classify Re-classify Assign Curve Numbers Assign Curve Numbers Curve Number Lookup Curve Number Lookup Pre-Developed = average of undeveloped Pre-Developed = average of undeveloped Rain Water Harvesting; 100% → CN =0 Rain Water Harvesting; 100% → CN =0 Combine Land Use and Soils Combine Land Use and Soils Create Curve Number Grid Create Curve Number Grid Run Arc-Hydro Run Arc-Hydro 2001 NLCD ClassificationRevised Classification Description 11Open Water19Open Water 21Developed, Open Space14Residentail- 1/2 acre lot 22Developed, Low Intensity13Residential- 1/4 acre lot 23 Developed, Medium Intensity12Residential- 1/8 acre lot 24Developed, High Intensity10Commercial and business 31Barren Land3Pasture/Range- poor 41Deciduous Forest7Wood or forest- good 42Evergreen Forest7Wood or forest- good 43Mixed Forest7Wood or forest- good 52Scrub/Shrub3Pasture/Range- poor 71Grassland/Herbaceous5Meadow 81Pasture/Hay4Pasture/Range- good 82Cultivated Crops2 Cultivated Land- w/o Conservation 90Woody Wetlands19Open Water 95 Emergent Herbaceous Wetland19Open Water Soil Group Land Cover Description Code ABCD Cultivated Land- w/ Conservation Cultivated Land- w/o Conservation Pasture/Range- poor condition Pasture/Range- good condition Meadow Wood or forest- poor cover Wood or forest- good cover Open spaces- good condition Open spaces- fair condition Commercial and business areas Industrial districts Residential- 1/8 acre lot Residential- 1/4 acre lot Residential- 1/2 acre lot Parking lots1598 Paved street1698 Gravel street Dirt street Open Water19100 Soil Group Land Cover Description Code ABCD Cultivated Land- w/ Conservation Cultivated Land- w/o Conservation Pasture/Range- poor condition Pasture/Range- good condition Meadow Wood or forest- poor cover Wood or forest- good cover Open spaces- good condition Open spaces- fair condition Commercial and business areas Industrial districts Residential- 1/8 acre lot Residential- 1/4 acre lot Residential- 1/2 acre lot Parking lots Paved street Gravel street Dirt street Open Water % Rain Water Harvesting Soil Group Land Cover Description Code ABCD Cultivated Land- w/ Conservation Cultivated Land- w/o Conservation Pasture/Range- poor condition Pasture/Range- good condition Meadow Wood or forest- poor cover Wood or forest- good cover Open spaces- good condition Open spaces- fair condition Commercial and business areas Industrial districts Residential- 1/8 acre lot Residential- 1/4 acre lot Residential- 1/2 acre lot Parking lots1598 Paved street1698 Gravel street Dirt street Open Water19100 From SCS TR-55 =CN old *(100%-50%)

HEC-GeoHMS Convert ArcGIS into HMS Convert ArcGIS into HMS ArcHydro, CN grid as input ArcHydro, CN grid as input Basin Parameters: Basin Parameters: Slope, Centroid, Elevation, Average CN, Lag Time, Area Slope, Centroid, Elevation, Average CN, Lag Time, Area Reach Parameters: Reach Parameters: Slope, Length Slope, Length Extremely Finicky Extremely Finicky

HEC-HMS: Basin Model Loss: SCS Curve Number Loss: SCS Curve Number Transform: SCS Unit Hydrograph Transform: SCS Unit Hydrograph Baseflow: none Baseflow: none Routing: Kinematic Wave Routing: Kinematic Wave Loss/Gain: none Loss/Gain: none Different for each scenario Same for all scenarios

HEC-HMS: Meteorologic Model SCS Type II, 30 minute SCS Type II, 30 minute Frequency (yr) Duration (min)30 Depth (in) Depth (mm) Actual storm: 8/8/05 Actual storm: 8/8/05

Results: Hypothesis Post-Development is higher, flashier than pre-development Post-Development is higher, flashier than pre-development Rain water harvesting is lower, less flashy than post- development Rain water harvesting is lower, less flashy than post- development Flow Time

Results: 100 Year Storm

Results Used 15% RWH with multiple storms Used 15% RWH with multiple storms Only 100 yr storm produced runoff Only 100 yr storm produced runoff Smaller storms (1 – 5 yr) had no runoff Smaller storms (1 – 5 yr) had no runoff

Limitations Much simplified hydrologic model Much simplified hydrologic model 15% RWH = 15% of land use has CN = 0 15% RWH = 15% of land use has CN = 0 Does not account for area within land use that does not participate in RWH Does not account for area within land use that does not participate in RWH 15% RWH ≠ 15% of population participating in RWH 15% RWH ≠ 15% of population participating in RWH 15% RWH = 15% of land participating 15% RWH = 15% of land participating

Conclusions 15% RWH ≈ Pre-Developed Conditions 15% RWH ≈ Pre-Developed Conditions More than 15% RWH could have drastic effects on urban hydrograph More than 15% RWH could have drastic effects on urban hydrograph Coarse model Coarse model Somebody should refine Somebody should refine HEC-GeoHMS is a great tool but… HEC-GeoHMS is a great tool but… It is extremely finicky, and can be frustrating It is extremely finicky, and can be frustrating

Questions? If time allows…click here

Data Sources Tutorials: Tutorials: NHDPlus: NHDPlus: NED, NLCD: NED, NLCD: Land Use Classification: Land Use Classification: SSURGO: SSURGO: STATSGO: STATSGO: Design Storm: Design Storm: Rain gage data: Rain gage data: