hydrologic analysis for nps 319 and cmi grants dave fongers, hsu, mdeq, 517-373-0210,...
Post on 20-Jan-2016
224 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Hydrologic Analysis for NPS 319 and CMI Grants
Dave Fongers, HSU, MDEQ, 517-373-0210, fongersd@michigan.gov
Hydrologic Analysis for NPS 319 and CMI Grants
DefinitionsHydrology: the occurrence, distribution, and
movement of water both on and under the earth's surface.
Stream Morphology: the form and structure of a stream (sinuosity, profile, and cross-sectional dimensions).
Morphologic Stability: no net change in channel shape, which occurs only if the channel-forming flow is also stable. A stable stream will have natural erosion.
Hydrologic changes can cause a stream to be unstable for 60 years or more.
Channel-Forming Flow is the flood discharge that causes the channel to assume its existing shape.
Extreme flood flows generally have little effect on channel morphology because they are so rare. More frequent flows, those that recur about every 1.5 to 2-years, are generally the dominant channel-forming flows in stable, natural streams (Schueler, 1987 and Rosgen, 1996).
Increase Flow or SlopeIncrease Sediment, Erosion
Water can carry 64 times larger particles if the velocity is doubled.
Hager Creek
Instability is indicated by extensive, excessive erosion, especially along straight reaches.
Down-cuts are good indicators of instability.
Hager Creek
A more typical down-cut.
Hager Creek
A. Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion
B. Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs
C. Understand and plan for future hydrologic change
D. Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan
Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis
A. Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion
B. Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs
C. Understand and plan for future hydrologic change
D. Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan
Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis
A. ID erosion causes Blakeslee Creek
Land Use
Change
Predicted 50 percent chance (2-year) flow from calibrated model.
Pre-development Post-development
Blakeslee CreekA. ID erosion causes
70% increase in peak flow,
170% increase in runoff volume,
former instantaneous peak flow now lasts ~4 hours
Blakeslee Creek
Instability is indicated by extensive, excessive erosion, especially along straight reaches.
Gage AnalysisA. ID erosion causes
4712 cfs 67% (1.5-year), 6368 cfs 50% (2-year), 10397 cfs 10% (10-year)
Muskegon River near Newago
4712
5712
6712
7712
8712
9712
10712
11712
12712
8/30
/30
8/29
/32
8/29
/34
8/28
/36
8/28
/38
8/27
/40
8/27
/42
8/26
/44
8/26
/46
8/25
/48
8/25
/50
8/24
/52
8/24
/54
8/23
/56
8/23
/58
8/22
/60
8/22
/62
8/21
/64
8/21
/66
8/20
/68
8/20
/70
8/19
/72
8/19
/74
8/18
/76
8/18
/78
8/17
/80
8/17
/82
8/16
/84
8/16
/86
8/15
/88
8/15
/90
8/14
/92
Date
Dis
char
ge
(cfs
)
Gage Analysis
Gage AnalysisA. ID erosion causes
Sometimes the cause of the erosion is obvious.
Pine River
Cause Cause
Cause
Cause Cause Cause Cause
A. ID erosion causes
Livestock
A. ID erosion causesFoot Traffic
This erosion may be caused by flow diverting around debris or ice piling against the former bridge supports. Nearby streambanks are stable.
Bear CreekA. ID erosion causes
Flow Obstructions
A. ID erosion causes
Natural Erosion
A. Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion
B. Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs
C. Understand and plan for future hydrologic change
D. Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan
Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis
Fleming’s/River Rouge
This CMI-funded detention pond’s drainage area is nearly fully developed. Based on the grantee’s hydrologic analysis, the 2-year event release rate is 0.018 cfs/acre.
B. BMP design
This erosion started 80 years ago when fourteen miles of natural stream was diverted to a three-mile long, straight channel. The hydrologic study provided design flows.
East Branch AuGres RiverA. ID erosion causes
Hager Creek
Hydrologic analysis provided design flows. Hydraulic analysis verified the effect of the proposed channel changes.
B. BMP design
A. Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion
B. Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs
C. Understand and plan for future hydrologic change
D. Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan
Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis
Black RiverC. Plan for future changes
Black River, 4% stormC. Plan for future changes
Sand CreekC. Plan for future changes
Sand CreekC. Plan for future changes
Sand CreekC. Plan for future changes
Sand CreekC. Plan for future changes
Sand CreekC. Plan for future changes
Watershed
Yield, area-weighted
average (cfs/acre)
2-year 25-year
Cedar Creek 0.004 0.03
Black River 0.006 0.03
Gun River 0.009 0.04
Pigeon River 0.010 0.05
Bear Creek, Muskegon
0.010 0.07
Coldwater River 0.015 0.05
Sand Creek 0.021 0.09
Mitchell Creek 0.022 0.14
Ryerson Creek 0.029 NA
Bear Creek, Kent 0.037 0.15
0.13
0.05
C. Plan for future changes
From Gun River Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study, Appendix 6C. Plan for future changes
From Gun River Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study, Appendix 6C. Plan for future changes
Soil Group
Detention Requirements
Release Rate (cfs per impervious acre)
Volume (cubic feet per impervious acre)
A 0.026 3,000
B 0.034 4,000
C 0.051 5,800
D 0.059 5,800
A or B soil infltrate
C or D soil0.05 cfs per impervious acre release rate5,800 cubic feet of detention storage per impervious acre
A. Help identify the cause(s) of streambank erosion
B. Facilitate the selection and design of suitable stabilization BMPs
C. Understand and plan for future hydrologic change
D. Help define critical areas for the Watershed Management Plan
Goals of NPS Hydrologic Analysis
D. Define critical areas
SubbasinWetland
RankAgricultural
Rank
Yield (cfs/acre)
Rank
% Change Runoff Volume
Rank
Total Runoff Volume
Rank
Total Ranking
BC1 1 1 4 2 1 9
BC2 2 3 4 4 1 14
BC2T 3 4 3 3 2 15
BC3 3 3 2 3 4 15
BC4 4 3 3 2 6 18
BC4Tn 4 3 2 1 2 12
BC4Ts 3 3 2 2 3 13
CR1 1 1 1 1 3 7
CR2 2 1 2 2 4 11
Excerpt from Coldwater River Watershed Management Plan, Tables 13 & 14
Total Rank 5-10 11-13 14-15 16+
Priority Very Low Low High Very High
top related