FLOOD11632 ‎(2)‎

• County: Costilla
• Community: Costilla County
• Stream Name: Rito Seco
• Basin: Rio Grande
• Title: Approximate Floodplain - Rito Seco
• Date: 1/5/2007
• Prepared For: Costilla County
• Prepared By: HDR Engineering, Inc.
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Floodplain Report/Masterplan

costilla.rep
River: Rio Seco Reach: 1 R5: 2373 Profile: 50-Year
warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within ~he specified number of iterations. The
program used critical depth
for the water surface and continued on with the calculations.
warning:The velocity head has changed by more than 0.5 ft (0.15 m). This may indicate the need for
additional cross sections.
Warning:The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is less than 0.7
or greater than 1.4.
This may indicate the need for additional cross sections.
Warning :The energy loss was greater than 1.0 ft (0.3 m). between the current and previous cross
section. This may indicate
the need for additional cross sections.
warning:~uring the standard step iterations, when the assumed water surface was set equal to
critical depth, the calculated
water surface came back below critical depth. This indicates that there is not a. valid
subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth.
Note: Multiple critical depths were found at this location. The critical depth with the lowest,
valid, water surface was
used.
River: Rio Seco Reach: 1 R5: 2373 Profile: 100-Year
warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within the specified number of iterations. The
program used critical depth
for the water surface and continued on with the calculations.
warning:The velocity head has changed by more than 0.5 ft (0.15 m). This may indicate the need for
additional cross sections.
warning:The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is less than 0.7
or greater than 1.4.
This may indicate the need for additional cross sections.
warning :The energy loss was greater than 1.0 ft (0.3 m). between the current and previous cross
section. This may indicate
the need for additional cross sections.
warning:DUring the standard step iterations, when the assumed water surface was set equal to
critical depth, the calculated
water surface came back below critical depth. Th's indicates that there is not a valid
subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth.
Note: Multiple critical depths were found at this location. The critical depth with the lowest,
valid, water surface was
used.
River: Rio Seco Reach: 1 RS: 2373 Profile: 200-Year
Warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within the specified number of iterations. The
program used critical depth
for the water surface and continued on with the calculations.
warning:The velocity head has changed by more than 0.5 ft (0.15 m). This may indicate the need for
additional cross sections.
warning:The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is less than 0.7
or greater than 1.4.
This may indicate the need for additional cross sections.
Warning :The energy loss was greater than 1.0 ft (0.3 m). between the current and previous cross
section. This may indicate
the need for additional cross sections.
warning:DUring the standard step iterations, when the assumed water surface was set equal to
critical depth, the calculated
water surface came back below critical depth. This indicates that there is not a valid
subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth.
Note: Multiple critical depths were found at this location. The critical depth with the lowest,
valid, water surface was
used.
River: Rio Seco Reach: 1 R5: 2373 Profile: 500-Year
warning:The energy equation could not be balanced within the specified number of iterations. The
program used critical depth
for the water surface and continued on with the calculations.
warning:The velocity head has changed by more than 0.5 ft (0.15 m). This may indicate the need for
additional cross sections.
warning:The conveyance ratio (upstream conveyance divided by downstream conveyance) is less than 0.7
or greater than 1.4.
This may indicate the need for additional cross sections.
Warning :The energy loss was greater than 1.0 ft (0.3 m). between the current and previous cross
section. This may indicate
the need for additional cross sections.
warning:DUring the standard step iterations, when the ass~med water surface was set equal to
critical depth, the calculated
water surface came back below critical depth. This indicates that there is not a valid
subcritical answer. The
program defaulted to critical depth.
Note: Multiple critical depths were found at this location. The critical depth with the lowest,
valid, water surface was
Page 14