Currumbin Creek Catchment Hydrological Study
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Currumbin Creek Catchment Hydrological Study April 2014 1 Title: Currumbin Creek Catchment Hydrological Study Author: Study for: City Planning Branch Planning and Environment Directorate The City of Gold Coast File Reference: WF50/44/- TRACKS #43749416-v1 Version history Changed by Reviewed by & Version Comments/Change & date date 1.0 Draft Review Review Review Review Distribution list Name Title Directorate Branch Currumbin Creek Catchment – Hydrological Study, April 2014 TRACKS-#43749416-v1 Page 2 of 65 Executive Summary The Natural Hazards (NH) team of the City Planning Branch is undertaken a comprehensive hydrological study of the Currumbin Creek catchment. The Council of the City of Gold Coast (Council) commissioned WRM Water and Environment Pty Ltd (WRM) to undertake a study to review and update its hydrological models to a consistent standard in December 2007. WRM assessed all aspects of model development, calibration, estimation of design discharges and provided a set of recommendations (12.10 ) including a recommendation to update all hydrological models to a consistent standard. Furthermore Monte Carlo methodologies have since become available and it was considered necessary to contrast these methods with the standard Design Event Approach (DEA). This study addresses the WRM recommendation and includes Monte Carlo methodologies for comparative analysis. The main objective of this study is to develop a hydrological model for the Currumbin Creek catchment using the URBS modelling software, calibrate and verify the model against historical flood data, verify the modelling results against Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA) and Joint Probability Analysis (JPA). Finally, estimate the design flood discharges for events ranging from 2 years Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) to the Probable Maximum Precipitation Design Flood (PMPDF) and document all the works to a consistent standard. In this study, the URBS model for the Currumbin Creek catchment was developed using the current land uses, topographic data sets and best available industry standard modelling approaches. The hydrological study undertaken by Council’s NH team has been reviewed by WRM, Council’s Peer Review Group (PRG) and Don Carroll Project Management. Calibration and verification data for 22 historical flood events between 1954 and 2013 were sourced for this study from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). From the available data, four events (January 2013, January 2008, June 2005 and February 2004) were selected for calibration and another four events (November 2004, February 1990, April 1972 and February 1972) were selected for verification. The selections of calibration and verification events were based on quality of recorded data sets. The calibration attempted to match the predicted and recorded flood peaks, volumes, shapes and timing of the hydrographs. A single set of model parameters were adopted for all calibration, verification and design events. Rainfall losses were adjusted to achieve the best possible hydrograph shapes and flood volumes. A uniform initial loss and a continuing loss rates were calibrated for each event. Table below shows the set of model parameters adopted for all calibration, verification and design event simulations: Parameter Adopted Value α (Channel lag) 0.14 (Catchment lag) 1.8 m (Catchment non-linearity) 0.65 N (Muskingum non-linearity) 1 F (Fraction of sub-catchment forested) F*0.5 Currumbin Creek Catchment – Hydrological Study, April 2014 TRACKS-#43749416-v1 Page 3 of 65 Very good agreement was achieved between modelled and rated discharges from recorded levels at Nicolls Bridge Gauging Station (GS) for all calibration events. For the purpose of this report rated discharges from recorded levels are labelled as recorded discharges. The table below shows the modelled and recorded peak discharge at Nicolls Bridge GS for all calibration events. Peak Discharge @ Nicolls Br GS (m3/s) Flood Event Modelled Recorded January 2013 164 155 January 2008 390 392 June 2005 259 251 February 2004 86 88 The calibrated URBS model was then used to estimate the design flood discharges throughout the Currumbin Creek catchment using the Design Event Approach (DEA). The design rainfall data including Intensity Frequency Duration (IFD), Temporal Patterns (TP), Areal Reduction Factor (ARF), rainfall spatial distribution and design rainfall losses adopted in this study were based on the recommendations made by WRM, Council’s Peer Review Group (Table 15) and Don Carroll Project Management. A Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA) was undertaken for the rated annual peak discharge at Nicolls Bridge GS. Forty three (43) years of recorded data were available at the time of this study. The methodology recommended in Book 4, Section 2 of Australian Rainfall and Runoff (1987) was used to fit a Log-Pearson Type III distribution for an annual series of rated peak flood discharges for this location. A Monte Carlo based Joint Probability Analysis (JPA) was also undertaken using two methodologies, viz. the Total Probability Theorem Monte Carlo (TPT MC) methodology and the Cooperative Research Centre – Catchment Hydrology Monte Carlo (CRC-CH MC) methodology. The design peak flood discharges throughout the Currumbin Creek catchment has been estimated using the DEA, FFA, TPT MC and CRC–CH MC methodologies. The peak design discharges for different ARIs at Nicolls Br GS estimated by these methods are shown in the table below: ARI Design Peak Discharge @ Nicolls Br GS (m3/s) (Year) DEA FFA TPT MC CRC-CH MC 2 107 101 131 123 5 170 167 185 175 10 220 214 235 220 20 281 266 280 272 50 353 343 343 340 100 413 410 398 385 200 464 486 458 446 The comparison table shows very good agreements among the DEA, FFA, TPT MC and CRC- CH MC estimates. Consequently the design hydrographs predicted in this study using the Design Event Approach are considered robust and will provide the most appropriate input to the Currumbin Creek Catchment – Hydrological Study, April 2014 TRACKS-#43749416-v1 Page 4 of 65 hydraulic models that will be used for flood planning and flood management studies in the Currumbin Creek catchment. The Table below shows the final peak design discharges at different locations within Currumbin Creek catchment for the 2 year ARI to PMP design flood events. It is of note that the design peak discharges estimated in the above comparison table are based on adopted ARF for the catchment area only upstream of Nicolls Bridge GS. However the design discharges estimated in the table below are based on adopted ARF for the total catchment area1. ARI Design Peak Discharge (m3/s) (Year) Camberra GS Nicolls Br GS Catchment Outlet 2 84 105 152 5 136 167 239 10 176 217 306 20 226 278 386 50 284 348 498 100 331 409 593 200 372 458 656 500 427 526 752 1000 537 656 951 2000 592 721 1042 PMPDF 1268 1548 2050 1 Adoption of an ARF for the total catchment is appropriate for deriving inflows for a hydraulic model of the lower Currumbin catchment. Currumbin Creek Catchment – Hydrological Study, April 2014 TRACKS-#43749416-v1 Page 5 of 65 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 3 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 9 1.2 Study Objective and Scope ............................................................................................... 10 1.3 Previous Studies ................................................................................................................ 10 1.3.1 WBM (1995) ............................................................................................................. 10 1.3.2 GCCC (2001)............................................................................................................ 10 1.4 Limitation Statement .......................................................................................................... 11 1.5 Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................. 11 2. Catchment Description ............................................................................................................... 12 2.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 12 2.2 Land Use ........................................................................................................................... 13 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 14 4. Available Data .............................................................................................................................. 16 4.1 Topographic Data .............................................................................................................. 16 4.2 Land Use Data ................................................................................................................... 16 4.3 Rainfall Data ...................................................................................................................... 16 4.4 Gauge Height Data ...........................................................................................................