Loading…
Unit Hydrograph Peak Rate Factor Estimation for Texas Watersheds
AbstractIn many cases, estimation of the peak discharge is the primary goal of hydrologic modeling. We employed a dataset of 1,648 rainfall-runoff events in 104 watersheds in Texas to explore the peak rate factor (PRF) of 2.08 recommended by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for dete...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of hydrologic engineering 2022-11, Vol.27 (11) |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3 |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Journal of hydrologic engineering |
container_volume | 27 |
creator | Lasco, Jonathan David D. Olivera, Francisco Sharif, Hatim O. |
description | AbstractIn many cases, estimation of the peak discharge is the primary goal of hydrologic modeling. We employed a dataset of 1,648 rainfall-runoff events in 104 watersheds in Texas to explore the peak rate factor (PRF) of 2.08 recommended by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for determining peak discharges with the unit hydrograph method, as well as the PRF’s dependency on watershed and storm characteristics. For each event, a unit hydrograph—assumed to follow a two-parameter gamma distribution—was determined by deconvolving the direct runoff hydrograph with the excess rainfall hyetograph. Results showed PRFs reaching up to 9.75 in Houston watersheds with a median of 0.58 and PRFs up to 11.02 with a median of 1.42 for the rest of Texas. It was also found that the recommended PRF of 2.08 falls between the 75th and 90th percentile of the 1,043 events analyzed in all regions except Houston, and is above the 95th percentile in all 605 events analyzed in Houston. Finally, statistical analysis showed that the PRF is primarily dependent on the watershed’s geomorphology but not on its slope, as was suggested earlier. This dependency, however, although statistically significant, explains only marginally the PRF variability. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002212 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2707846282</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2707846282</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLw0AUhQdRsFb_w6AbXaTeeWSSuLKE1AgFRVtcDtN52FZt6kwK9t87oVVXru6Dc869fAidExgQEOT6cvhcVld1NSAFZ0ma5nwAAJQSeoB6v7vD2EPOExBFcYxOQlgCEB6HHrqdrhYtrrfGN69eref40ao3_KRai0dKt43HVWgXH6pdNCvs4jixXyrglyjwYW5NOEVHTr0He7avfTQdVZOyTsYPd_flcJwoxrI2EQW4mdGcCGAkszkTyhGRKa7BFBRApOCYnVGVO26EcaxQQhs-K5xLjaaW9dHFLnftm8-NDa1cNhu_iiclzSDLuaA5jaqbnUr7JgRvnVz7-L3fSgKyIyZlR0zWlezoyI6O3BOLZrEzq6DtX_yP83_jN_0sbxY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2707846282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Unit Hydrograph Peak Rate Factor Estimation for Texas Watersheds</title><source>American Society Of Civil Engineers ASCE Journals</source><creator>Lasco, Jonathan David D. ; Olivera, Francisco ; Sharif, Hatim O.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lasco, Jonathan David D. ; Olivera, Francisco ; Sharif, Hatim O.</creatorcontrib><description>AbstractIn many cases, estimation of the peak discharge is the primary goal of hydrologic modeling. We employed a dataset of 1,648 rainfall-runoff events in 104 watersheds in Texas to explore the peak rate factor (PRF) of 2.08 recommended by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for determining peak discharges with the unit hydrograph method, as well as the PRF’s dependency on watershed and storm characteristics. For each event, a unit hydrograph—assumed to follow a two-parameter gamma distribution—was determined by deconvolving the direct runoff hydrograph with the excess rainfall hyetograph. Results showed PRFs reaching up to 9.75 in Houston watersheds with a median of 0.58 and PRFs up to 11.02 with a median of 1.42 for the rest of Texas. It was also found that the recommended PRF of 2.08 falls between the 75th and 90th percentile of the 1,043 events analyzed in all regions except Houston, and is above the 95th percentile in all 605 events analyzed in Houston. Finally, statistical analysis showed that the PRF is primarily dependent on the watershed’s geomorphology but not on its slope, as was suggested earlier. This dependency, however, although statistically significant, explains only marginally the PRF variability.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1084-0699</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-5584</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002212</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: American Society of Civil Engineers</publisher><subject>Civil engineering ; Discharge ; Excess rainfall ; Flood peak ; Geomorphology ; Hydrographs ; Hydrologic models ; Hydrology ; Hyetographs ; Median (statistics) ; Natural resources ; Precipitation ; Probability distribution functions ; Rainfall runoff ; Rainfall-runoff relationships ; Resource conservation ; Runoff ; Statistical analysis ; Statistical methods ; Storms ; Technical Papers ; Watersheds</subject><ispartof>Journal of hydrologic engineering, 2022-11, Vol.27 (11)</ispartof><rights>2022 American Society of Civil Engineers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2562-906X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002212$$EPDF$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002212$$EHTML$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3239,10049,27901,27902,76160,76168</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lasco, Jonathan David D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olivera, Francisco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharif, Hatim O.</creatorcontrib><title>Unit Hydrograph Peak Rate Factor Estimation for Texas Watersheds</title><title>Journal of hydrologic engineering</title><description>AbstractIn many cases, estimation of the peak discharge is the primary goal of hydrologic modeling. We employed a dataset of 1,648 rainfall-runoff events in 104 watersheds in Texas to explore the peak rate factor (PRF) of 2.08 recommended by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for determining peak discharges with the unit hydrograph method, as well as the PRF’s dependency on watershed and storm characteristics. For each event, a unit hydrograph—assumed to follow a two-parameter gamma distribution—was determined by deconvolving the direct runoff hydrograph with the excess rainfall hyetograph. Results showed PRFs reaching up to 9.75 in Houston watersheds with a median of 0.58 and PRFs up to 11.02 with a median of 1.42 for the rest of Texas. It was also found that the recommended PRF of 2.08 falls between the 75th and 90th percentile of the 1,043 events analyzed in all regions except Houston, and is above the 95th percentile in all 605 events analyzed in Houston. Finally, statistical analysis showed that the PRF is primarily dependent on the watershed’s geomorphology but not on its slope, as was suggested earlier. This dependency, however, although statistically significant, explains only marginally the PRF variability.</description><subject>Civil engineering</subject><subject>Discharge</subject><subject>Excess rainfall</subject><subject>Flood peak</subject><subject>Geomorphology</subject><subject>Hydrographs</subject><subject>Hydrologic models</subject><subject>Hydrology</subject><subject>Hyetographs</subject><subject>Median (statistics)</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>Probability distribution functions</subject><subject>Rainfall runoff</subject><subject>Rainfall-runoff relationships</subject><subject>Resource conservation</subject><subject>Runoff</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Statistical methods</subject><subject>Storms</subject><subject>Technical Papers</subject><subject>Watersheds</subject><issn>1084-0699</issn><issn>1943-5584</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEtLw0AUhQdRsFb_w6AbXaTeeWSSuLKE1AgFRVtcDtN52FZt6kwK9t87oVVXru6Dc869fAidExgQEOT6cvhcVld1NSAFZ0ma5nwAAJQSeoB6v7vD2EPOExBFcYxOQlgCEB6HHrqdrhYtrrfGN69eref40ao3_KRai0dKt43HVWgXH6pdNCvs4jixXyrglyjwYW5NOEVHTr0He7avfTQdVZOyTsYPd_flcJwoxrI2EQW4mdGcCGAkszkTyhGRKa7BFBRApOCYnVGVO26EcaxQQhs-K5xLjaaW9dHFLnftm8-NDa1cNhu_iiclzSDLuaA5jaqbnUr7JgRvnVz7-L3fSgKyIyZlR0zWlezoyI6O3BOLZrEzq6DtX_yP83_jN_0sbxY</recordid><startdate>20221101</startdate><enddate>20221101</enddate><creator>Lasco, Jonathan David D.</creator><creator>Olivera, Francisco</creator><creator>Sharif, Hatim O.</creator><general>American Society of Civil Engineers</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2562-906X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221101</creationdate><title>Unit Hydrograph Peak Rate Factor Estimation for Texas Watersheds</title><author>Lasco, Jonathan David D. ; Olivera, Francisco ; Sharif, Hatim O.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Civil engineering</topic><topic>Discharge</topic><topic>Excess rainfall</topic><topic>Flood peak</topic><topic>Geomorphology</topic><topic>Hydrographs</topic><topic>Hydrologic models</topic><topic>Hydrology</topic><topic>Hyetographs</topic><topic>Median (statistics)</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>Probability distribution functions</topic><topic>Rainfall runoff</topic><topic>Rainfall-runoff relationships</topic><topic>Resource conservation</topic><topic>Runoff</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Statistical methods</topic><topic>Storms</topic><topic>Technical Papers</topic><topic>Watersheds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lasco, Jonathan David D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olivera, Francisco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharif, Hatim O.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Journal of hydrologic engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lasco, Jonathan David D.</au><au>Olivera, Francisco</au><au>Sharif, Hatim O.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Unit Hydrograph Peak Rate Factor Estimation for Texas Watersheds</atitle><jtitle>Journal of hydrologic engineering</jtitle><date>2022-11-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>11</issue><issn>1084-0699</issn><eissn>1943-5584</eissn><abstract>AbstractIn many cases, estimation of the peak discharge is the primary goal of hydrologic modeling. We employed a dataset of 1,648 rainfall-runoff events in 104 watersheds in Texas to explore the peak rate factor (PRF) of 2.08 recommended by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for determining peak discharges with the unit hydrograph method, as well as the PRF’s dependency on watershed and storm characteristics. For each event, a unit hydrograph—assumed to follow a two-parameter gamma distribution—was determined by deconvolving the direct runoff hydrograph with the excess rainfall hyetograph. Results showed PRFs reaching up to 9.75 in Houston watersheds with a median of 0.58 and PRFs up to 11.02 with a median of 1.42 for the rest of Texas. It was also found that the recommended PRF of 2.08 falls between the 75th and 90th percentile of the 1,043 events analyzed in all regions except Houston, and is above the 95th percentile in all 605 events analyzed in Houston. Finally, statistical analysis showed that the PRF is primarily dependent on the watershed’s geomorphology but not on its slope, as was suggested earlier. This dependency, however, although statistically significant, explains only marginally the PRF variability.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>American Society of Civil Engineers</pub><doi>10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002212</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2562-906X</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1084-0699 |
ispartof | Journal of hydrologic engineering, 2022-11, Vol.27 (11) |
issn | 1084-0699 1943-5584 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2707846282 |
source | American Society Of Civil Engineers ASCE Journals |
subjects | Civil engineering Discharge Excess rainfall Flood peak Geomorphology Hydrographs Hydrologic models Hydrology Hyetographs Median (statistics) Natural resources Precipitation Probability distribution functions Rainfall runoff Rainfall-runoff relationships Resource conservation Runoff Statistical analysis Statistical methods Storms Technical Papers Watersheds |
title | Unit Hydrograph Peak Rate Factor Estimation for Texas Watersheds |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T18%3A06%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Unit%20Hydrograph%20Peak%20Rate%20Factor%20Estimation%20for%20Texas%20Watersheds&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20hydrologic%20engineering&rft.au=Lasco,%20Jonathan%20David%20D.&rft.date=2022-11-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=11&rft.issn=1084-0699&rft.eissn=1943-5584&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002212&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2707846282%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a337t-690fbdc4160317e836af167a4c0d9200650f3eb2a8f4d6df39a6cd4b9ff5dc2e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2707846282&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |