Laserfiche WebLink
<br />coefficients for conveyance elements were increased by 25 percent. Two types of conveyance <br />elements within catchment areas were simulated using channel elements; a grassed channel and a <br />street The grassed channel simulates the channel in catchments dominated by open space and/or <br />agricultural activities The street channel simulates stormwater transport in catchments dominated <br />by de,'elopment, Typical parameters used tor conveyance elements are shown in Table 5 <br />Catchment widths and conveyance element parameters for individual catchments are listed in the <br />computer output summary in Appendix A <br /> <br />Table 5, Typical ConvC)'ance Element Pllramelers <br /> <br /> D(~h Side Slope, Manningn' BottomWidt.'l <br /> H:V I~Order 2 Order 3 Order , <br />Lnannel <br />Main , 3 3:1 0,044 , 7,5 10 <br />Overt1ow 10 20:1 0,056 23 25.5 28 <br />Slrut , <br />Main 0.5 3:1 0-020 , . . . <br />Overflow , 10 20:1 ON4 , '1 '1 , 11 , <br /> <br />'increaso:dby2S% <br /> <br />C. Calibration <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />Hydrographs produced by UDSWM arc calibratcd to CL'HPF hydrographs for the IOO-year event <br />using the five catchments within the study area sho\vn on Figure 4 in Chapter II Flood peak <br />~alibration 1S summarized on Table 6 (VJ-lPF and L'DS,",,':\!! ttoo,] hydrograph~ lor the 100-year <br />evcnt are compared on Figure 8, All individual or contiguous catchments in the study area meding <br />the following criteria were used tor calibration, (1) area less than 200 acres, (2) reasonably uniform <br />shape, (3) length-width ratio less than 4, and (4) catchment slope between OJ105 and 0,037 !lift, <br />Flood peak and hydrographealibration forc'l:isting and fitture percent i mperviousness was achieved <br />by multiplying the UDSWIv\ catchment width parameter~ for all catchment~ by I 8 This <br />multiplication factor was also applied 10 the catchment width parameter for all other ,torm events <br />(0,4-ineha\'eraileslorm.a!\d2.,5-.1O-.and50-vearewnts) <br />- . <br /> <br />Tahle 6. Flood Peak Calibration, CDSW:\I to Cl'HPF <br /> <br />Ex;.\,t,,, Percentft"l'erv,ollsne$,' <br />Catchment-- r----Fl00dPeak (efs) % different from <br /> , CUHPF <br /> , CUHPF UDSWM <br />221(PT) I '" 18J 3% <br />212/213(PT) 188 187 -1% <br />430(CC) ; 1M 163 .1% <br />440/442 (CC) 186 2'- 20% <br /> -, I <br />645IBC) "" 21' 5% <br /> <br />FUllIrePercenlf iou.,ne$s <br />Catchment Flood Peak (cfs) %differentfromi <br /> CUHPF I <br /> CLBPF lJDSWM , <br />221(PT) 396 361 -9% <br />212/213(PT) 503 435 -14% <br />430(CC) 204 204 0% <br />440/442:~)C) 190 2'0 21>% <br />645 C 204 2lS 5% <br /> <br />NOlO PT" Prince Tributary, CC" Coal Creek Tributaries, <br />BC=BollJderCreekTributarie, <br /> <br />D, Detention Areas <br /> <br />FOllr derention fadlitie, located ",ithin subdivisions (Arapahoe Ridge r-;o, t, Arapahoe Ridge No ::. <br />Orchard Glen riling ;.10, I, and Canyon Creek Filing No. I) were incorporated in the existing and futurc <br />conditions hydrologic models, Design information tor these detention facilities was obtained Irom the final <br />drainage reports for these subdivisions, There are no as-built plans available for these detention fae.ilities, <br />Field inspection indicates some of the dctention facilities were likely not eonstructed according to the final <br />drainage reports Two SlOan detention facilities located in Harvest Point subdivisi<)ll were not modeled <br />beeauseofan absence of design information, <br /> <br />Inadvertent swrmwatcl detention at such areas as stock ponds and at railroad embankments was generally <br />nM modeled An undersized eu]vert below the abandoned BI'."RR embankment near ;.Iortheast County Line <br />Road was modeled to include delemion upstream of the embankment caused by the culvert, using design <br />intormationobtainedfromaerialphotographyandfieldinspection. <br /> <br />Rating curves tor the detention facilities are developed using Federal Highway Administration ~lodel HY.8 <br />computer program (federal Highway Administration, 1996), the orifice equalion (C .. 0,62 (UDFCD, <br />1969)), arld the weir equation (C = 3,0 (UDFeD, ]9(;>9))_ Stage/slOrage relationships ",ere obtained from <br />the tinal drainage reports Storage/dbcharge relationships for detention area> are listed in the computer <br />output summar)' in Appendi~ A <br /> <br />1J1-2 <br />