Laserfiche WebLink
<br />predicted stage at a downstr<~am loca'tion. <br />Previous corps experience 1,dth flood warning systems in Ne- <br />braska and Iowa has shown that: a combination of stage and the <br />rate of change in stage at the! 1Ilarning gaqe has more bearing <br />on flood severity at downs1:re!am locations, than the stage <br />alone at the warning gage. Flat:e o:E rise relates directly to <br />the shape of the incident hydrograph. By using 2 or more up- <br />stream gages capable of defining rate of rise, it is possible <br />to better evaluate an approaching flood wave. Factors which <br />are important to the flood coordinators dl~cision making pro- <br />cess, such as flood wave at1::emuation, can be evaluated from <br />rate of rise and stage data at 2 gages. This can be done <br />while the flood is still within the ,:::hannl~l banks, making it <br />unnecessary to rate the entire valley cr(JSS section to pro- <br />vide flood warning. <br />Rates of rise were computed using a HEC'-l model of the <br />sin. Those rates of rise w'~re applied to the hydraulic <br />ings computed for bClth gage si t:es. The initial alarm <br />tings for each gage were established" based upon <br />hydraulics and local condi ticms. 'rhe pr(Jposed initial <br />tings are listed in ~~able 2. <br /> <br />ba- <br />rat- <br />set- <br />site <br />set- <br /> <br />TABI,E 2. <br />INITIAL FLOOD ALARM I,EVELS <br />stages in Feet of Eleva1:ion above Mean Sea I,evel <br />Discharges in Cubic Fee't Per Second <br /> <br />FLOOD WARNING GAGE WARNING LEVEL STAGE DISCHARGE <br /> (msl) (cfs) <br />Highway 52 (Upstream Gage) <br /> Upper 4772.0 1,400 <br /> * Middle 4770.0 775 <br /> L01,e,r 4768.0 315 <br />County Road (Downstream Gage:1 <br /> Uppe,r 461.3.0 6,250 <br /> * Middle 4611.5 4,150 <br /> Lowe,r 4609.0 7.50 <br /> <br />* The middle float stage is flexible, bu1: it mus1: be set so <br />as not to interfere with the upper or lower floats. <br /> <br />The rates of rise between 1:he lower and upper warning lev- <br />els, which are characteris1:ic of th,: rising limbs of floods <br />of 10, 50, 100 and 500 year intensity, are listed in Table 3. <br />Note that the rise time bet:ween floats, listed for the <br />500-year flood at the downstre,am gag':, is much shorter than <br />the rise time for the 100-year flood, as a result of a two <br />peaked hydrograph. Between t:he peaks, the water level falls <br />below both the upper and middle floats. Rise time is mea- <br />sured on the first rise, which occurs from local runoff, be- <br />fore the larger flood arrivl,s from upstream portions of the <br />basin. A second high stagE' alarm will bl~ generated with the <br /> <br />Eo <br />