Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Hydraulic Analysis <br />Water surface elevations for the 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year floods <br />were computed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' step backwater com- <br />puter program HEC-2. (Reference 11). The version used was the HEC-2 <br />release dated November 1976, updated August 1977, with corrections and <br />modifications. Manning's "n" values for the channel were computed using <br />the formula n = 0.222(S + 0.001)0.33 where S is the channel slope. <br />This formula was extracted from a paper by V. V. Golubtstov in "Soviet <br />Hydrology: Selected Papers," published in 1969 by the American <br />Geophysical Union (Reference 12). Resultant "n" values are listed in <br />Table 5. <br /> <br />Stream <br />Lefthand Creek <br />James Creek <br />Little James Creek <br /> <br />Table 5 <br />Manning's Roughness Coefficients <br />"n" Values <br />Overbanks <br />0.080 <br />0.080 <br />0.080 <br /> <br />Channels <br />0.060-0.120 <br />0.075 <br />0.080 <br /> <br />Corps of Engineers. Water surface elevations for James Creek were <br />started at the flood elevations resulting from coincident discharges on <br />James Creek. Bridges were analyzed using a blockage criteria dependent <br />upon bridge construction and water depth. <br />Concrete and steel bridges were assumed unobstructed until the <br />upstream water surface elevations reached the bridge "low steel" eleva- <br />tion at which time the bridge was assumed fully obstructed. Wooden <br />bridge decks were assumed destroyed due to debris. This type of bridge <br />was assumed unobstructed at all discharges with wingwalls and abutments <br />in place but the deck removed. Head losses at fully obstructed bridges <br />were determined by weir computations. Unobstructed bridge losses were <br />computed by using the normal bridge routine in HEC-2. <br />Velocities throughout this study were sufficiently high (greater <br />than 10 feet per second at some locations) that significant movement or <br />shifting of the stream bed is anticipated. This shifting of the bed may <br />cause some changes in the flood outline or profile which are impossible <br />to predict. <br /> <br />The results obtained from the HEC-2 computer model were verified by <br />comparing them to ground photographs of the 1969 flood through Jamestown. <br />No other high water mark data were located which could be used to <br />calibrate the hydraulic model. <br />Starting water surface elevations for Upper Lefthand Creek were <br />obtained from the Lower Lefthand Creek Study conducted in 1979 by the <br /> <br />9 <br />