My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD06021
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
FLOOD06021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:07:37 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 1:56:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Larimer
Stream Name
Big Thompson
Basin
South Platte
Title
Flood History of the Big Thompson River Basin: Flash Floods, Paleofloods, and Dam-Break Floods
Date
1/1/1979
Prepared For
Larimer
Prepared By
USGS
Floodplain - Doc Type
Flood Documentation Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />, ~S'../ <br /> <br />/' Hydrologic and Hydraulic Research in Mountain Riven <br /> <br />estimated with existing guidelines, typically by a fac- <br />tor of! to 2. <br /> <br />0.16 <br /> <br />f- <br />Z <br />!!! 0.14 <br />u <br />it <br />~ 0.12 <br />u <br />l/l <br />13 0.10 <br />z <br />:r <br />g O.OS <br />o <br />a: <br />l/l <br />to 0.06 <br />:z <br />Z <br />:l 0.04 <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />Arkansas River (site ,) <br /> <br />Clear Creek Is~e 2) <br /> <br />. Eagle River (site 5) <br /> <br />0.020 2 4 6 S 10 12 14 <br />RELATIVE SMOOTHNESS, R1D50 ' <br /> <br />Figure 4. Relation of Manning's Roughness Coefficient <br />to Relative Smooth..... and Friction Slope. <br /> <br />Because data from higher-gradient rivers indicate <br />that the flow resistance varies considerably with <br />depth of flow (and because of the difficulty in visually <br />estimating n values during onsite inspection), equa- <br />tions were developed to assist in the assessment of <br />flow resistance in mountain rivers. Multiple- <br />regression analyses of Manning's n were related to <br />measured hydraulic and sediment-size variables. The <br />analyses indicated that n varies directly with friction <br />slope and inversely with hydraulic radius. The equa- <br />tion developed for predicting Manning's n in natural <br />mountain channels with cobble or boulder bed materi- <br />al is: <br /> <br />n = 0.32 SO.38~.16 <br /> <br />(1) <br /> <br />where S is the energy gradient (Dr friction slope) in <br />meter per meter, and R is the hydraulic radius in <br />meters. Alternately, <br /> <br />n = 0.39 SO.38~.16 <br /> <br />where S is the energy gradient (or friction slope) in <br />foot per foot, and R is the hydraulic radius in feet. If <br />the channel is relatively uniform, water-surface slope <br />or bed slope (river gradient) can be used in Equations <br />(1) and (2). <br /> <br />'Z-CR <br /> <br />The average standard error of estimate of <br />Equations (1) and (2) was 28 percent for the Colorado <br />data. The equation had the same accuracy when other <br />data for higher gradient rivers of the world (gradients <br />as high as 0.052 meter per meter or foot per foot) were <br />used (Jarrett, 1984). Equations (1) and (2) are appli- <br />cable for relatively clear-water flow in stable channels <br />with minimal bank vegetation, regular banks, and <br />few obstructions. Equations (1) and (2) are defined for <br />gradients from 0.02 to 0.052 meter per meter (foot per <br />foot) and for hydraulic radii from 0.15 to 2.2 meters <br />(0.5 to 7 feet). Paul and Dhillon (1987) and Cheadle <br />and Thome (1988) verified the accuracy of Equations <br />(1) and (2) with other data from higher-gradient <br />mountain rivers, and also determined that Equations <br />(1) and (2) predict n values with the same accUracy or <br />better than equations bssed on relative smoothness. <br />Cheadle and Thorne (1988) also indicated that <br />Equations (1) and (2) have little bias and that it pre- <br />dicted n values on rivers with gradients as high as <br />0.09 meter per meter (foot per foot). <br />Velocity and discharge for a reach of river generally <br />are estimated using the Manning equation. Therefore, <br />regime-flow equations for predicting velocity and dis- <br />charge in mountain rivers also were developed from <br />Colorado data (Jarrett, 1984). These equations are: <br /> <br />V = 3.17 RO.83S0.12 <br /> <br />(3) <br /> <br />and <br /> <br />Q = 3.17 ARO.83S0.12 <br /> <br />(4) <br /> <br />where V is the mean flow velocity in meters per sec- <br />ond, Q is the discharge in cubic meters per second, <br />and A is the cross-sectional area of flow in square <br />meters. Alternatively, <br /> <br />V = 3.81 RO.83S0.12 <br /> <br />(5) <br /> <br />and <br /> <br />Q = 3.81 ARO.83S0.12 <br /> <br />(6) <br /> <br />(2) <br /> <br />where V is the mean flow velocity in feet per second, <br />Q is the discharge in cubic feet per second, and A is <br />the cross-sectional area of flow in square feet. These <br />equations have the same applicability, limitations, <br />and accuracy as Equations (1) and (2). Use of <br />Equations (3) through (6) provides a means of solving <br />directly for velocity and discharge for mountain rivers <br />with hydraulic characteristics (R, S, and bed-material <br />sizes) similar to the Colorado rivers without the need <br />for a subjective evaluation of channel roughness. A <br />report is available to assist in the determination of <br /> <br />425 <br /> <br />WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN <br />1/,"1-b) #- 3 I /q'lC) <br /> <br />J"AiZt2eTT <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.