Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7 <br /> <br />HMR 55A is about 4 percent at 6- to 72-hours if the precipitation <br />during these durations is considered non-orographic, and from 14 <br />to 18 percent if it is considered orographic. Larger percentage <br />reductions than these are found at 1-hour, in line with the <br />behavior of the HMR-52 technique evidenced in basin studies for <br />slightly smaller drainages in the eastern united states such as <br />those reported in NOAA Technical Memorandum, NWS HYDRO 39, <br />"Probable Maximum Precipitation for the Upper Deerfield River <br />Drainage in Massachusetts/Vermont," Silver Spring, Maryland, 1984 <br />and NOAA Technical Memorandum, NWS HYDRO 41, "Probable Maximum <br />Precipitation Estimates for the Drainage Above Dewey Dam, Johns <br />Creek, Kentucky, Silver Spring, Maryland, 1985. <br /> <br />'" <br />t,. <br /> <br />In Figures 2-5, the isohyets are seen to converge into a <br />single line outside of and mostly surrounding the Cherry Creek <br />Drainage boundary. These so-called "concurrent" values may not <br />be fully accurate everywhere and they should not be used for any <br />hydrologic application. <br /> <br />It is cautioned that the average 10-mi2 depths shown in <br />Table 1 for sea level are NOT comparable with values from Figure <br />29 of HMR 52 or Figures 18, 20, or 22 of HMR 51, especially along <br />the coastline of the Gulf of Mexico. These Figures may also been <br />found in Appendices A and C. The values in Table 1 are to be <br />regarded as temporary expedients, accurate in their own right, <br />toward the goal of calculating within-storm depths of PMP at a <br />common elevation as required for HMR 52. These calculations <br />could (just as well) have been performed at some other elevation <br />either below or above the barrier elevations of the Cherry Creek <br />Drainage. <br /> <br />Furthermore, the choice of a pseUdo-adiabatic lapse rate for <br />adjusting average, 10-mi2, among-storm depths from the Cherry <br />Creek Drainage to a common elevation was arbitrary. What matters <br />in this case is that the inverse of the adjustment that "brought" <br />values from one level to another is used to "return" them to <br />their original elevation. The cautionary comments of paragraph <br />8.4.2.2 of HMR 55A ("We noted that the atmosphere produced equal <br />magnitudes of rainfall in the May 31, 1935 Storm at Cherry Creek <br />(6,900 feet) and at Hale (4,000 feet). Our concern. . . in <br />transposing to lower elevations led us to adopt a change to <br />previous studies. In this study, we make a consensus decision <br />. . . to control unrealistic maximizations in general storms.") <br />are the basis for the present concern that the values of Table 1 <br />in this study not be compared with among-storm values from other <br />reports. <br /> <br />Neither is it correct to infer that because the values of <br />Table 1 are larger than values from other HMR's, the values from <br />Plates Ib-IVb from HMR 55A in the Cherry Creek Drainage are too <br /> <br />\. <br />