Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The project budget and schedule only allowed for field surveying of three cross-sections on the <br />Gunnison River. The selection of the field-surveyed cross-sections was based on the availability <br />of a nearby benchmark, the accessibility of the location, and the ability to survey the opposite <br />bank. Field estimates were made of the average water depth, but the channel bottoms were not <br />surveyed. Estimations of the Mannings 'n' value were made at each surveyed cross-section <br />location during the field survey. <br /> <br /> <br />TABLE 5 <br />GUNNISON RIVER CROSS-SECTION SELECTION <br /> <br />.Iifl.!~~~ <br /> <br /> <br />.,-...'_._.:...'_..:.._.:..,-..-,-.-.:.'..........-:'..',"-',"" <br />D.~iYYATIqN.............../I <br />..... .... ...J!JJOO ............................... <br />..~~...........................i................ <br />.-,.,-,...-,..--...'..... <br /> <br />4.3 <br /> <br />Field Survevs and Cross-Section PreDaration <br /> <br />22000, 24700 (G2) NONE <br /> <br />DETAILED STUDY <br />ALREADY <br />PERFORMED <br /> <br />FEMA STUDY <br /> <br />Type 1 - <br />Type 2 - <br /> <br />Field surveyed cross-sections used only in the representative reach' <br />" ' <br />Field surveyed cross-sections transferred from a reach with similar <br />characteristics using input parameters specific to the reach in question; <br />Hybrid cross-sections using map-derived data and field observations; <br /> <br />2 23093, 25893 (G3) A-A' CALCULATED <br />3 23093, 25893 (03) NONE CANYON REACH N/A <br />4 24004, 26914 (G4) B-B' 3 CALCULATED <br />5 24004, 26914 (G4) C-C' 3 CALCULATED <br />6 24004, 26914 (G4) CA-CA' 2 (FROM B-B') CALCULATED <br />7 24856, 27868 (05) D-D' I CALCULATED <br />8 24856, 27868 (G5) E-E' 3 CALCULATED <br />9 24856, 27868 (G5) NONE CANYON REACH N/A <br />10 26162, 29334 (G6) G-G" I CALCULATED <br />11 26162, 29334 (G6) NONE CANYON REACH N/A <br />12 27000, 30000 (G7) H-H' 2 (FROM E-E') CALCULATED <br />· - Map- enve cross-sectIOn F-F was prepare, ut It was not use . It was offiltte <br />cross-section, G-G', located in the same reach, better represents that reach. <br />4.4 Computing Flood DeDths <br /> <br /> <br />For some reaches, field-surveyed cross-sections from other stream reaches were transferred to the <br />reach in question. Appropriate adjustments were made to ground elevations. When flow depths <br />were computed, the appropriate slope values, Manning's 'n' values, and flow values were used. <br /> <br />Map-derived cross-sections were utilized for the remaining reaches. Some map-derived cross- <br />sections ~ere modified to more accurately represent actual channel shapes. Canyon reaches on <br />the GunnIson were not generally represented by cross-sections since the level of detail obtained <br />could not 1>: shown on the base maps. There was one exception where a cross-section was used <br />for a canyon reach, and it is discussed below. <br /> <br />The cross-sections used for the computation of flood depths can be grouped into three different <br />types: <br /> <br />Type 3 - <br /> <br />By using these categories to identify cross-section sources, 8 of the 12 reaches on the Gunnison <br />River were divided into the following groups: <br /> <br />Type I Cross-sections - <br />Type 2 Cross-sections - <br />Type 3 Cross-sections - <br /> <br />3 reaches <br />2 reaches <br />3 reaches <br /> <br />Flood depths were calculated at each cross-section through a computer program (QANY) which <br />uses Manning's equation. The input parameters for the calculation of flow included: x and y <br />coordinates for points on the cross-section, Manning's 'n' values (rangingfrom 0.03 to 0.032for <br />the channel and 0.04 to 0.055 for the overbank) (Reference 7), the channel slope (interpreted <br />from USGS quadrangle maps), and depth values. The program calculated flow and velocity <br />values for each depth value entered. The target flow values were those values established in <br />Section 3.0 and shown on Table 3. Rating curves were established from the calculated depths. <br />From the rating curves 50-year and 1 DO-year flood elevations were established at each location. <br /> <br />There were 4 additional reaches which were classified as follows: 3 canyon reaches for which <br />no cross-sections were developed; 1 reaach where a detailed study had already been performed. <br /> <br />Table 5 identifies the cross-sections, the group type, and flow values used to calculate the flood <br />depths. The cross-sections, with 50-year and 1 DO-year flood lines illustrated, are presented after <br />. Section 4.4 in Figures 7A-7H. <br /> <br />In performing the depth calculations the flow on the river the day of the survey was obtained <br />from the USGS and subtracted from the established 50-year and 100-year flows for each <br />particular hydrologic point. The depth of water on the day of the survey was estimated and <br />added to the flood depth calculations to obtain the true flood depths shown in Table 6. The <br />methodology used for computing flood depths at the cross-sections is similar to the accepted <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />16 <br />