Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The drainage-basin flood-estimation method <br />developed in this study is similar to the regional <br />flood-estimation method developed by Lara <br />(1987) because both methods estimate flood <br />discharges on the basis of morphologic relations. <br />While the standard errors of estimate appear to <br />be higher for the drainage-basin equations than <br />for Lara's equations (Lara, 1987, p. 28), a direct <br />comparison cannot be made because of the <br />different methodologies used to develop the <br />equations. Lara's method is based on the <br />physiography of broad geographic landform <br />regions defined for the State, whereas the <br />drainage-basin method presented in this report <br />is based on specific measurements of basin <br />morphology. The drainage-basin equations are <br />independent of hydrologic regionalization. The <br />application of regional equations often requires <br />that subjective judgments be made concerning <br />basin anomalies and the weighting of regional <br />discharge estimates. This subjectivity may <br />introduce additional unmeasured error to the <br />estimation accuracy of the regional discharge <br />estimates. The drainage-basin regression <br />equations presented in this ro~port provide a <br />flood-estimation method that minimizes the <br />subjectivity in its application to the ability of the <br />user to measure the characteristics. <br /> <br />Example of Equation Use-- <br />Example 1 <br /> <br />Examole I.--An application of the drainage- <br />basin flood-estimation method can be illustrated <br />by using the equation (listed in table 2) to <br />estimate the 100-year peak discharge for the <br />discontinued Black Hawk Creek at Grundy <br />Center crest-stage gaging station (station <br />number 05463090; map number 73, fig. 1), <br />located in Grundy County, at a bridge crossing <br />on State Highway 14, at thE' north edge of <br />Grundy Center, in the NWl/4, sec. 7, T. 87 N., R. <br />16 W. Differences between manually computed <br />values (table 1) and values computed using the <br />GIS procedure (tables 1 and 9) are due to <br />differences in applying the techniques. <br /> <br />Step 1. The characteristics used in the <br />drainage-basin equation (table 2) are <br />contributing drainage area (CDA), relative relief <br />(RR), drainage frequency (D.fi'), and 2-year, <br />24-hour precipitation intensity (TTF). The <br />primary drainage-basin characteristics used in <br />this equation are total drainage area (TDA), <br /> <br />noncontributing drainage area (NCDA), basin <br />relief (BR), basin perimeter (BP), number of <br />first-order streams (FOS), and 2-year, 24-hour <br />precipitation intensity (TTF). These primary <br />drainage-basin characteristic measurements <br />and the scale of maps to use for each manual <br />measurement are described in Appendix A and <br />Appendix B. <br /> <br />Step 2. The topographic maps used to <br />delineate the drainage-divide boundary for this <br />gaging station are the DMA 1:250,000-scale <br />Waterloo topographic map and the USGS <br />1:100,000-scale Grundy County map. Figure 4A <br />shows the drainage-divide boundary that was <br />delineated for this gaging station on the <br />1:250,000-scale map. Contributing drainage <br />area (CDA) is calculated from the primary <br />drainage-basin characteristics total drainage <br />area (TDA) and noncontributing drainage area <br />(NCDA). The total drainage area published for <br />this gaging station in the annual streamflow <br />reports of the U.S. Geological Survey is 56.9 mi2 <br />(table 9). Inspection of the 1:100,000-scale map <br />does not show any noncontributing drainage <br />areas within the drainage-divide boundary of <br />this basin. The contributing drainage area <br />(CDA) is calculated as <br /> <br />CDA = TDA-NCDA, <br /> <br />(10) <br /> <br />= 56.9-0, <br />::: 56.9 mi 2 . <br /> <br />Step 3. Relative relief (RR) is calculated <br />from the primary drainage-basin characteristics <br />basin relief (BR) and basin perimeter (BP). The <br />difference between the highest elevation <br />contour and the lowest interpolated elevation in <br />the basin measured from the 1:250,000-scale <br />topographic map gives a basin relief of 181 ft <br />(table 1). Figure 4C shows an approximate <br />represent.ation of the topography for this <br />drainage basin. The drainage-divide boundary <br />delineated on the 1:250,OOO-scale topographic <br />map (fig. 4A) is used to measure the basin <br />perimeter, which is 33.5 mi (table 1). Relative <br />relief (RR) is calculated as <br /> <br />18 ESTiMATING DESIGN-FLOOD DISCHARGES FOR STREAMS IN IOWA <br /> <br />~ <br />