Development of a Stream Rating Curve

Similar documents
Technical Note. Hydraulic Flow Capacity of Concrete Cloth

CVE 372 HYDROMECHANICS OPEN CHANNEL FLOW I

Rational Method Hydrological Calculations with Excel COURSE CONTENT

MVP 17.3 WATER BAR END TREATMENT SIZING AND DETAILS 1/22/18

LAKE COUNTY HYDROLOGY DESIGN STANDARDS

Design of Open-Channel Waterways

Module 3: Rainfall and Hydrology for Construction Site Erosion Control

Development of Stage-Discharge Ratings for Site 2240 Bear Creek at Cold Spring

Introduction to Storm Sewer Design

Development of a Stage-Discharge Rating for Site Van Bibber Creek at Route 93

NCEES NCEES-PE. NCEES - PE Civil Engineering.

Water Budget III: Stream Flow P = Q + ET + G + ΔS

Water Budget III: Stream Flow P = Q + ET + G + ΔS

Prepared for: City of Jeffersonville. November Prepared by

Water Budget III: Stream Flow P = Q + ET + G + ΔS

Stream Reaches and Hydrologic Units

Water Budget III: Stream Flow P = Q + ET + G + ΔS

World Meteorological Organization Working together in weather, climate and water

TDOT DESIGN DIVISION DRAINAGE MANUAL CHAPTER V ROADSIDE DITCHES & STREAMS

Flow Diversion Banks: On earth slopes

Modeling watershed nutrient fluxes & delivery to coastal waters. Pennsylvania State University. Collaborators

Measuring discharge. Climatological and hydrological field work

HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC TABLES AND CURVES

Methods of Streamflow Analysis

ATTACHMENT 6 WATER QUALITY SWALE DESIGN ADDENDUM

Introduction. Keywords: Oil Palm, hydrology, HEC-HMS, HEC-RAS. a * b*

FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5) 1.0 Overview

Low Gradient Velocity Control Short Term Steep Gradient Channel Lining Medium-Long Term Outlet Control Soil Treatment Permanent [1]

The Texas A&M University and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Hydrologic Modeling Inventory (HMI) Questionnaire

Session A6- Mannings "n" roughness characteristic occurring in semi-smooth turbulent flow of nature- Iike fishways

Effects of Riparian Vegetation on Channel Hydraulics and Flow Conveyance

Comparison of Streamflow and Precipitation in the Upper Provo River Watershed

Learn how to design inlet grates, detention basins, channels, and riprap using the FHWA Hydraulic Toolbox and WMS

PART 3 - STANDARDS FOR SEWERAGE FACILITIES DESIGN OF STORM SEWERS

CVEN 339 Summer 2009 Final Exam. 120 minutes allowed. 36 Students. No curve applied to grades. Median 70.6 Mean 68.7 Std. Dev High 88 Low 24.

HYDROLOGIC & HYDRAULIC ASPECTS of the Walnut Street Bridge over the Schuylkill River Philadelphia, PA

HY-12 User Manual. Aquaveo. Contents

Reservoir on the Rio Boba

Drop Height For Channel Erosion Control

The Influence of LWD and Tributary Confluences on the Local Grain Size Distributions of the H.J. Andrews Stream Network

Discharge Estimation in a Backwater Affected River Junction Using HPG

RETENTION BASIN EXAMPLE

Slash Water Bar Video

Technical Memorandum

[1] Level spreaders can release sheet flow down steep slopes, but the level spreader itself must be constructed across a level gradient.

CHANGES IN STREAM FLOW WITHIN A LINEAR CHANNEL

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR SLOPE PROTECTION STRUCTURES. Definition

Learning objectives. Upon successful completion of this lecture, the participants will be able to describe:

Overview of NRCS (SCS) TR-20 By Dr. R.M. Ragan

1 n. Flow direction Raster DEM. Spatial analyst slope DEM (%) slope DEM / 100 (actual slope) Flow accumulation

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR RIPRAP. Conditions Where Practice Applies

Highway Surface Drainage

LOW WATER CROSSINGS, fords, or drifts, as they

Flow Diversion Banks: On grassed slopes

ASSESSMENT OF DRAINAGE CAPACITY OF CHAKTAI AND RAJAKHALI KHAL IN CHITTAGONG CITY AND INUNDATION ADJACENT OF URBAN AREAS

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 7, July-2014 ISSN Sruthy Nattuvetty Manoharan

Table of Contents CHAPTER. Chapter 2 Hydrologic Analysis. 2.1 Estimating Runoff

Prepared for Urban Drainage and Flood Control District

LINED WATERWAY OR OUTLET (Feet) Code 468

Simplified Forms of Surface Runoff Estimation Method for Silt- Loam Soils Suat Irmak, Soil and Water Resources and Irrigation Engineer, Professor

APPENDIX F RATIONAL METHOD

PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT NEWCASTLE FIRE STATION OLD STATE HIGHWAY

UNIT I: UNIFORM FLOW PART B

Ponds. Pond A water impoundment made by excavating a pit, or constructing a dam or an embankment.

Low Gradient Velocity Control Short Term Steep Gradient Channel Lining Medium-Long Term Outlet Control Soil Treatment Permanent [1]

PEARCE CREEK CONFINED DISPOSAL AREA MODIFICATION

Appendix I OFFICE OF THE MORGAN COUNTY SURVEYOR STORMWATER DESIGN MANUAL 7/1/2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS PART III - MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS Section 105 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS AND SCOPE 105.1

Open Channel Flow. Ch 10 Young, Handouts

Determining Peak Flow Under Different Scenarios and Identifying Undersized Culverts

APPENDIX IV. APPROVED METHODS FOR QUANTIFYING HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS OF CONCERN (NORTH ORANGE COUNTY)

Stormwater Erosion Control & Post-Construction Plans (Stormwater Quality Plans)

Basic Design of Replogle Flumes

Chapter Description. Describe the hydraulic principles and apply the fundamental concept in analyzing flow in open channels.

EXAMPLE SHEET FOR TOPIC 2 AUTUMN Q1. What is the significance of the Reynolds number Re for the flow of fluid in a circular pipe?

Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for a Timber Harvesting Operation

Jacobi, Toombs, and Lanz, Inc.

EFFECT OF NANO-CEMENT IN REDUCING THE VALUE OF ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT

WinTR-55 Small Watershed Hydrology

Development of a GIS Tool for Rainfall-Runoff Estimation

DIVISION 5 STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA

Dawson County Public Works 25 Justice Way, Suite 2232, Dawsonville, GA (706) x 42228

Irrigation Structures 2. Dr. M. R. Kabir

INITIAL INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN PLANT MCMANUS ASH POND A (AP-1) 40 CFR

Flood Risk Analysis of Bridge A Case Study

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR GRASSED WATERWAYS. Definition. Purpose

Distribution Restriction Statement Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Chapter 7 Ditches and Channels

Measuring Stream Discharge (Q)

Chapter 2: Selecting Best Management Practices (BMPs)

CACHE VALLEY STORM WATER DESIGN STANDARDS. As Amended by Logan City November 2010

Bluff Creek One Water

PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE EDI MASTER PLAN

Outlet Flow Velocity in Circular Culvert

Wastewater Flow Monitoring Services

STORM DRAINS AND IRRIGATION

Assessing ecological flow conditions for wetlands fed from ungauged stream reaches

HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSES OF THE HENNEPIN CANAL FROM LOCK 27 TO THE ROCK RIVER. by Misganaw Demissie and Nani G. Bhowmik

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Unit 2: Geomorphologic and Hydrologic Characteristics of Watersheds. ENVS 435: Watershed Management INSTR.: Dr. R.M. Bajracharya

Transcription:

Development of a Stream Rating Curve Luis F. Andino Galeano landino@illinois.edu Abstract. Understanding the characteristics of streams is necessary to design and apply methods to achieve a sustainable management. Streamflow, Roughness Coefficient, and Rating Curve are elements in hydrology that help to a better understanding of this complex science. This study was conducted to observe and quantify those elements. Description of one crosssection, calculation of flowrate and Roughness Coefficient and the Manning s Equation were used to define physical properties of the stream in two sections. Both sites had similar conditions in the parameters previously mentioned. The calculations obtained from applying the Manning s Equation and Roughness Coefficient are a representative estimate of the observations in the field. Keywords. Roughness coefficient, Manning s equation, streamflow, and stream channel.

Introduction In East-Central Illinois, many agricultural fields require drainage systems to transport water to ditches and rivers. Understanding the characteristics of streams is necessary to design and apply methods to achieve a sustainable management. There are multiple aspects that can be studied in this field: flow, water quality, the composition of the bank and stream bed, biodiversity, ecological processes, chemical-physical properties, response to climate variables, and others. This experiment is focused on some of those elements and in the interaction that they could have. Certain activities or natural phenomena could have some effects on streams. In order to address those effects, it is necessary to gain knowledge and to have a clear interpretation of the characteristics involved in this area. This report summarizes field observations, calculations, and explanations about a particular stream in the Champaign County, Illinois. The overall objective of this report is to better understand basic concepts of open channels. The specific objectives are to determine a Roughness Coefficient from observation of field conditions, to develop a rating curve for a section of a section of an open channel, to develop a routine to solve for flow in natural channels and to develop a routine for solving Manning's Equation. Methods and materials Location. The study was conducted south of the Urbana/Champaign area, Champaign County, Illinois (Figure 1). The geographic coordinates in the Universal Transverse Mercator System of the segment of the observed ditch are 396314 Easting, 4434569 Northing. The evaluated ditch drains mainly water from corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max (l.) Merr.) grown for research and educational purposes in its surroundings. Figure 1. Satellite image of the site of study (Google Earth, 2016)

Materials. Engineer s level, surveying rod, measuring tape and flags were used for field measurements. Data analyses and mathematical procedures were calculated in Microsoft Excel, and Google Earth provided imagery for illustrations and spatial observation. Methods. Measurements were taken on August 31 st, 2016 at the described location. The results presented in this report correspond to Group 2 of the Drainage and Water Management Course (ABE 459). Two additional groups performed similar measurements 147.5ft downstream (Group 1) and 53 upstream (Group 3). A cross-section of the open channel was divided into different sections (from a distance of 0, 6, 11, 13, 20, 24, 28, 32, and36 ft.) from one side to the other. The depth of the bottom of the channel and water surface level were assessed with a surveying rod and an engineer's level (with a common datum for all measurements on each point of the cross-section). This information was used to determine the channel shape at that cross-section. Additionally, stream flow rate was calculated using a floating object that traversed a known length at five points of the cross-section (4,5,8,11, and 14 ft from side to side) and timing three times in each section. The roughness coefficient (n) of the bank and stream bed were calculated using the Natural Stream Uniform Flow Spreadsheet (USDA 1993). The n equation (Limerinos, 1970) considers the hydrological radius (R) in feet which is the cross-sectional area divided by the wetted perimeter, and depth in feet (Limerinos, 1970). 0.0926R 1 6 n = 1.16 + 2.0log ( R d ) Flow rate (Q) was calculated using the Manning Equation, where A is the cross-sectional area, R is equal to A divided by the wetted perimeter, n is the Roughness Coefficient and is constant to change the result to Imperial System units. For this report, it was assumed that the Manning Equation was always applicable. Q = A R2 3s 1 2 n Routines to estimate flow (Q) were development based on the n equation (Limerinos, 1970) and the Manning equations. The first routine contains data from two cross sections and the second one for solving Manning Equation in rectangular and trapezoidal channels.

elevation (feet) Results and discussion There is a difference of 5.97 ft. between the bottom of the open channel and the highest point contained in the cross-section (Table 1). Although the cross-section of the channel had a similar shape along its path, there could be some changes. The deepest point of the stream is located close to the third measured station, not in the middle (Figure 2), this could be an indicator of higher erosion rates due to steep slopes. Table 1. Calculation of the elevation of the channel cross-section Tape(ft) HI Rod (ft) Rot (in) Rod Elevation1 Distance Diff. elevation from bottom 0 5.635 0 5.635 6.052 100.948 0 5.635 6 3.583 6 3.583 8.104 98.896 6 3.583 11 2.646 11 2.646 9.042 97.958 11 2.646 13 0.000 13 0.000 11.688 95.313 13 0.000 20 0.396 20 0.396 11.292 95.708 20 0.396 24 0.521 24 0.521 11.167 95.833 24 0.521 28 2.531 28 2.531 9.156 97.844 28 2.531 32 4.354 32 4.354 7.333 99.667 32 4.354 36 5.969 36 5.969 5.719 101.281 36 5.969 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 0 10 20 30 40 station (feet) Figure 2. Stream cross-section shape. The roughness coefficient (n) of the bank and stream bed are 0.04 and 0.033 respectively. The stream bank is composed mainly of Earth, with moderate irregular sides, with gradual changes in size and shape of cross section, no obstruction and a high retardant effect of vegetation. The stream bed contained fine gravel, has smooth irregularities on the sides with occasional

ftᵌ/s n changes in size and shape of the cross-section and no effect of obstruction and retardance due to vegetation. This n value of the site evaluated by group 3 indicates that the roughness coefficient increases when the depth is higher. The n value of the site evaluated by group 2 is more constant. 0.070 0.060 0.050 0.040 0.030 0.020 n G2 n G3 0.010 0.000 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 Depth (ft) Figure 3. Manning s n value for depth. The rating curve indicates that depth increments will increase flow at higher rates, especially to the section measure by group 2 (Figure 4). Although the sites analyzed by groups 2 and 3 should have a similar flow, physical differences in the cross-section will prevent them from being equal. Tile outlets could also make differences in flow between two close sites, which are not easily distinguishable in some cases. 1200 1000 800 600 400 Q G2 Q G3 200 0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 Depth (ft) Figure 4. Rating curve of sites analyzed by groups 2 and 3

The routine to calculate Q for the two cross-sections (2 and 3) indicate that different values for the analyzed characteristics may result in equal estimation of streamflow (Q) (Table 2). A bed slope of 0.01 was considered between sites. Routine between points 1 and 3 were not possible to calculate due to some measurement errors in site 1. Routine to calculate Manning s equation is in the attached Excel file. Table 2. Result of the routine to calculate Q in two cross-sections Bed Slope: 0.01 A R n n-prime Q Grupo 2 26.50 1.491181 0.034452 0.038732 132.9041 Grupo 3 25.17 1.439781 0.041015 0.03592 132.9041 Conclusions There are similarities between the physical characteristics of the sites of the stream analyzed by Groups 2 and 3. The distance between them did not influence flow, Roughness coefficient, and shape of the cross-sections. The Manning s Equation is applicable to the stream where this study was conducted because consistent results were obtained through that method. The calculations are a representative estimate of the observations in the field. Besides applying adequate methods to obtain information related to roughness, cross-sectional areas or flow rates, it is important to properly use the tools, techniques to avoid unwanted variations in the results. Precision is desired in every study. Likewise, the proper interpretation of the data leads to better decisions in the management of the streams. References Google Earth. (September, 14, 2016). Champaign County, Illinois. UTM 16N E396314 N4434569. Limerinos, J. T. (1970). Determination of the Manning coefficient from measured bed roughness in natural channels. USGS water Supply Paper 1898-B: 52 pages. USDA. 1993. Natural Stream Uniform Flow Spreadsheet. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available at: www.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed September 14, 2016.