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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of hydrologic engineering 2022-11, Vol.27 (11)
Main Authors: Lasco, Jonathan David D., Olivera, Francisco, Sharif, Hatim O.
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 &amp; 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 &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; 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