of 17 /17
Improvement of rating curve through Manning's Equation and LiDAR Sylvia A. Sueno and Hannah A. Aventurado University of the Philippines Disaster Risk Exposure and Assessment for Mitigation (DREAM) Project

Improvement of Rating Curve Through Manning's Equation … · Improvement of rating curve through Manning's Equation and LiDAR ... Q BQ HH =G =R A #BQ HH 5/ 3 ... Improvement of Rating

Embed Size (px)

Text of Improvement of Rating Curve Through Manning's Equation … · Improvement of rating curve through...

  • Improvement of rating curve through Manning's Equation and LiDAR

    Sylvia A. Sueno and Hannah A. AventuradoUniversity of the Philippines

    Disaster Risk Exposure and Assessment for Mitigation

    (DREAM) Project

    Pres

    ente

    d at th

    e FIG

    Wor

    king W

    eek 2

    016,

    May 2

    -6, 2

    016 i

    n Chr

    istch

    urch

    , New

    Zeala

    nd

  • Philippines and flooding

    Name Year USD

    Haiyan (Yolanda) 2013 2.02 billion

    Bopha (Pablo) 2012 1.04 billion

    Rammasun (Glenda) 2014 871 million

    Parma (Pepeng) 2009 608 million

    Nesat (Pedring) 2011 333 million

    Fengshen (Frank) 2008 301 million

    Megi (Juan) 2010 255 million

    Ketsana (Ondoy) 2009 244 million

    Mike (Ruping) 1990 241 million

    Angela (Rosing) 1995 241 million

  • Meteorological Sensors in the Philippines

    Only baseflow discharge is available!

  • Surveyed Flow Data

    Dipalo Bridge, Pangasinan

    y = 2E-165e4.293x

    R = 0.8297

    0

    0.5

    1

    1.5

    2

    2.5

    3

    88.46 88.48 88.5 88.52 88.54

    Dis

    char

    ge

    (cm

    s)

    Stage (MSL), m

    012345670

    500000

    1000000

    1500000

    2000000

    19/09/20140:00

    19/09/201415:00

    20/09/20146:00

    20/09/201421:00

    Rai

    nfa

    ll, m

    m

    Dis

    char

    ge,

    cm

    s

    Date & Time

    Rain Value

    Dipalo Bridge Hydrometry

    September 19-20, 2014

    Max Q: 1,834,234 cms

    Min Q: 2.15 cms

    Unrealistic!

  • River Measurements for Rating Curves

    Problem with baseflow measurements only

    In-situ river discharge measurements during high flows are dangerous and expensive

    to capture.

    The opportunities to gather field measurement are rare

    !Nonetheless, this is required to develop a good elevation-discharge relationship, or rating

    curve.

  • Agusan River Basin

    Typhoon Yolanda Date:

    November 10-16, 2013

    Typhoon Yolanda Total Precipitation:

    73mm (Mat-I Rain Gauge)

    Agusan River Watershed Size:

    10,921 km2

    Location of discharge measurement:

    Dankias, Las Nieves

    (845'1.55"N, 12535'14.52"E)

  • Hydrograph of TS Yolanda

    -1

    1

    3

    5

    7

    9

    11

    13

    15100

    300

    500

    700

    900

    1100

    1300

    1500

    11/10 12:30 11/11 3:30 11/11 18:30 11/12 9:30 11/13 0:30 11/13 15:30 11/14 6:30 11/14 21:30 11/15 12:30 11/16 3:30 11/16 18:30

    Pre

    cip

    itat

    ion

    (m

    m)

    Dis

    char

    ge

    (cm

    s)

    Discharge (cms) Precipitation (mm)

  • Problem

    Using only baseflow data of the Agusan River Basin,

    which procedure for extending the rating curve will best

    fit the actual river hydrograph?

  • Techniques for extending the rating curve

    1. Simple hydraulic technique Bankfull discharge estimated using Manning's Equation

    2. Computational hydraulic

    technique

    Discharge estimated at every point of the cross-section using Manning's Equation

    3. HECRAS, using LiDAR Rating curve tool; a hybrid cross-section is used

  • Mannings Equation

    = = 1

    23

    12

    Where:

    Q = Discharge (m3/s),

    A = Cross-sectional area of flow (m2),

    n = Mannings roughness coefficient,

    R = Hydraulic radius (m)

    S = Slope of the hydraulic grade line

  • Equation (2). Mannings Equation (Mannings n and slope are constant)

    =53

    23

    Where:

    =1

    12

  • Equation (3). Mannings Equation for bankfull discharge

    Q = 5/3

    2/3

  • Simple hydraulic technique

    y = 107.86e0.3503x

    R = 0.0476

    0

    200

    400

    600

    800

    1000

    0 2 4 6 8

    Dis

    char

    ge

    (cm

    s)

    Stage (MSL), m

  • Computational hydraulic technique

    y = 31.848e0.9539x

    R = 0.5373

    0

    2000

    4000

    6000

    8000

    0 2 4 6 8

    Dis

    char

    ge

    (cm

    s)

    Stage (MSL), m

  • 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000-4

    -2

    0

    2

    4

    6

    8

    agusanHECRAS Plan: Plan 01 2/17/2016

    Q Total (m3/s)

    W.S

    . E

    lev (m

    )

    Legend

    W.S. Elev

    y = 567.87e0.3314x

    R = 0.9603

    HECRAS, using LiDAR

  • Results

    R-squared

    Manning's with

    Bankfull

    Manning's with Bankfull and Cross-section

    Points HECRAS

    0.888 0.851 0.890

  • Recommendations:

    Possible validation can be done by comparing actual flood events and the result of a

    watershed-floodplain model calibrated using discharge generated rating curve