INTERIM REPORT NO. 1 FHWA/IN/JTRP-2005/1 ESTIMATION OF PEAK DISCHARGES OF INDIANA STREAMS BY USING log PEARSON (III) DISTRIBUTION by David Knipe Research Associate A. R. Rao Professor Principal Investigator School of Civil Engineering Purdue University Joint Transportation Research Program Project No. C-36-62O File No. 9-8-15 Prepared in Cooperation with the Indiana Department of Transportation Federal Highway of Administration U.S. Department of Transportation The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration and the Indiana Department of Transportation. The report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. School of Civil Engineering Purdue University May, 2005 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report is basically the M.S.C.E. thesis of David Knipe to the School of Civil Engineering at Purdue University. Professors Rao S. Govindaraju and Dennis A. Lyn served on Mr. Knipe’s thesis committee. We thank them for their ideas and guidance. Mr. Merril Dougherty (INDOT), Siavash Beik (Christopher B. Burke Engineering), Mr. David Finley (CTE Engineers), Mrs. Kate Flynn (U.S.G.S.) and Mr. Greg Koltun (USGS) provided data, opinions and information related to this work. Mr. Merril Dougherty (INDOT), Bruce Bowman (INDOT), David Finley (CTE Engineers, Inc.), Dan Ghere (FHWA), David Knipe (IDNR), Scott Newbolds (INDOT), David Pamplin (FHWA) and Jim Ude (INDOT) served on the Study Advisory Committee. We are grateful to their support. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES.....................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................vii LIST OF SYMBOLS .................................................................................................x ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................xii I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1 II. SOME METHODS FOR ESTIMATING PEAK DISCHARGES........................5 2.1 Coordinated Discharges...........................................................................5 2.2 Rainfall-Runoff Models...........................................................................7 2.3 Regression Models...................................................................................8 III. REGIONALIZATION OF WATERSHEDS.......................................................11 IV. DEVELOPMENT OF FLOOD FREQUENCY PREDICTION EQUATIONS.......................................................................................................17 4.1 Station Flood Frequency Analysis...........................................................17 4.2 Basin Characteristics................................................................................19 4.3 Generalized Least Squares Regression ....................................................24 4.4 Regression Results...................................................................................26 V. EVALUATION OF THE PREDICTION EQUATIONS .....................................34 5.1 Split Sample Test .....................................................................................39 5.2 Comparison to the IDNR Discharge Database ........................................43 5.3 Adjustment for Urbanization Effects.......................................................51 5.4 Gaps in Regionalization...........................................................................54 iv Page VI. APPLICATION OF THE PREDICTION EQUATIONS ...................................57 EXCEL Spreadsheet for Calculating Peak Discharges..................................57 Example 1: Sand Creek in Decatur County ..................................................59 Example 2: Bigler Ditch / Black Creek in Noble County.............................62 Example 3: Mill Creek in Putnam County....................................................65 VII. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................71 LIST OF REFERENCES...........................................................................................72 APPENDICES Appendix A: List of Gaging Stations Used in this Study .............................76 Appendix B: Flood Frequency Discharges for Gaging Stations...................87 Appendix C: List of IDNR Discharge Database Determinations........................................................................94 Appendix D: List of 14 Digit HUC Watersheds with Basin Parameters...............................................................................132 v LIST OF TABLES Table Page Table 4.1: Soil Runoff Coefficients and Hydrologic Soil Groups.............................22 Table 4.2: NCLD Land Cover Class Definitions......................................................23 Table 4.3: Homogeneity measures for defined regions ............................................27 Table 4.4: Regression results for Region 1...............................................................30 Table 4.5: Regression results for Region 2...............................................................30 Table 4.6: Regression results for Region 3...............................................................30 Table 4.7: Regression results for Region 4...............................................................31 Table 4.8: Regression results for Region 5...............................................................31 Table 4.9: Regression results for Region 6...............................................................31 Table 4.10: Regression results for Region 7.............................................................32 Table 4.11: Regression results for Region 8.............................................................32 Table 4.12: Ranges for various watershed characteristics........................................33 Table 5.1: Stations removed from regression for Spilt Sample test .........................40 Table 5.2: Split Sample error percentages ................................................................41 Table 5.3: Summary of 100-year discharges for Sugar Creek and Buck Creek.......55 Table 6.1: Regression results for Example 1 ............................................................62 Table 6.2 Basin Parameters and Calculated Discharges for Bigler Ditch / Black Creek Discharge points...................................................................63 Table 6.3 Calculated Discharges for each Bigler Ditch / Black Creek discharge point..........................................................................................65 Table 6.4: Excerpt from Appendix D for Mill Creek basin......................................68 Table 6.5: Regression results for Mill Creek above Rhodes Creek..........................68 vi Table Page Table 6.6: Excerpt from Appendix D for Mill Creek basin, with increase in urbanization .........................................................................69 Table 6.7: Regression results for Mill Creek above Rhodes Creek, with increase in urbanization ..........................................................................69 Table A.1: Stream Gaging Stations used in the analysis ..........................................76 Table B.1: Results from annual peak series frequency analysis...............................87 Table C.1: IDNR Discharge determinations with predicted values..........................94 Table D.1: Basin Parameters for HUC 14 basins .....................................................132 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Figure 1.1: The hydrologic cycle (IDNR, 1996).......................................................3 Figure 2.1: Coordinated Discharge Graph................................................................6 Figure 2.2: Flood Frequency Regions as defined by Glatfelter (1984) ....................10 Figure 3.1: Regions as defined by Ernst (2002) .......................................................12 Figure 3.2: Regions for Indiana as defined by Snirvas and Rao (2003)...................15 Figure 3.3: Regions as defined for this analysis .......................................................16 Figure 5.1: Comparison of 100 year observed discharges and regression model discharges for Region 1 .........................................................................35 Figure 5.2: Comparison of 100 year observed discharges and regression model discharges for Region 2 .........................................................................35 Figure 5.3: Comparison of 100 year observed discharges and regression model discharges for Region 3 .........................................................................36 Figure 5.4: Comparison of 100 year observed discharges and regression model discharges for Region 4 .........................................................................36 Figure 5.5: Comparison of 100 year observed discharges and regression model discharges for Region 5 .........................................................................37 Figure 5.6: Comparison of 100 year observed discharges and regression model discharges for Region 6 .........................................................................37 Figure 5.7: Comparison of 100 year