My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00279
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
Backfile
>
WMOD00279
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:29:19 PM
Creation date
7/18/2007 2:18:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Title
Applied Weather Associates Responses to Corps of Engineers Questions on the AWS Study of Cherry Creek PMP, Sept 2006
Prepared For
USACE
Prepared By
Applied Weather Associates
Date
1/29/2007
County
Douglas
Weather Modification - Doc Type
General Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />,~ ( c!"... <br /> <br />Information on the Big Elk Meadows and Big Thompson storms is taken from HMR 55A. <br />Discussions are provided in Section 2.4.1.8, page 42, for Big Elk Meadow and in Section 2.4,1.9, <br />page 44, for Big Thompson. HMR 55A in Table 2.2, page 19, lists the elevations ofthe two <br />storms at 8,000 and 8,300 feet respectively and both storm discussions refer to rainfall over the <br />first upslopes ofthe Rocky Mountains. A W A has concluded that neither of these storms are <br />transpositionable to the Cherry Creek drainage basin because the terrain characteristics of the <br />regions where the storms occurred are dissimilar to the topography associated with the Cherry <br />Creek drainage basin. <br /> <br />The following statement was included in the Final Report PowerPoint presentation: <br /> <br />Both the Gibson Dam, MT storm and the Big Elk Meadows, CO storm occurred over and west of <br />the first ups lopes and are not transpositionable to the Cherry Creek basin. <br /> <br />29. Appendix G. Response to Doeskens Comment 7. Has the response been prepared? <br /> <br />A W A response to Ouestion 29. <br /> <br />It appears that this response was never completed. Mr, Doeskens' comment is provided below: <br /> <br />7) Can you offer some sort of confidence in the accuracy of the time distribution and hourly <br />rainfall rates you show in section 4,1. I don't recall being as confident as you about hourly <br />rates, particularly from the 1935 storms. Wefind that eye witnesses, without the benefit of <br />recording gauges, often unintentionally exaggerate hourly rates. Even an error of just 10 <br />minutes in how long very heavy rains lasted could be a 17% overestimate of hourly rainfall. <br />Since we did have pretty good estimates of the observed rainfall rates with the Fort Collins and <br />the Pawnee Creek Floods, we learned that those events did not have extraordinarily high rainfall <br />rates and yet produced major flooding. While I agree it is possible, we've never actually seen <br />hourly rainfall rates exceed 6" per hour for an entire hour. I guess this may help argue that rate <br />and timing information that you show may already be hedged on the conservative side. <br /> <br />A W A included the mass curves for all of the analyzed storms in the study. The most extreme <br />were used to construct the design storm mass curve, To our knowledge, there is not additional <br />information on extreme rainfall rain rates in Colorado. By using the most extreme rain rates (as <br />reflected in the storm mass curves), the rain rates provided in the study represent our best <br />estimate ofthe most extreme rain rates possible for Colorado storms and are consistent with the <br />storm based site-specific PMP approach used in this study. <br /> <br />30. Appendix H, A W A Presentation, page 8 & 12. Why is the temporal envelopment curve <br />different from that shown in the final report? <br /> <br />A W A response to Ouestion 30. <br /> <br />The composite storm mass curves shown provide the shape ofthe most extreme rainfall rates for <br />the historic storms analyzed. Figure 10.1 in the final report scales this mass curve shape to the <br />largest of the adjusted rainfall values from Table 10.1. Figure 10,2 was used to determine a <br />spatial envelopment factor and Figure 10.3 provides the Depth-Duration Envelopment Curve <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.