This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

, Amsterdam - Printed in The Netherlands

165

**A WATER BUDGET MODEL FOR THE TROPICAL MAGELA FLOOD
**

PLAIN

ILIAS MIHAIL VARDAVAS

Alligator Rivers Region Research Institute, Office of the Supervising Scientist, P.O. Box 387, Bondi Junction, N.S.W. 2022 (Australia)

(Accepted 9 January 1989)

ABSTRACT Vardavas, I.M., 1989. A water budget model for the tropical Magela flood plain. Ecol. Modelling, 46: 165-194. A water budget model is presented for the tropical Magela flood plain, which is located downstream from the Ranger uranium mine in the Northern Territory, Australia. Using input data on rainfall and water discharge from Magela Creek, the model provides daily estimates of the volume of surface water on the flood plain and the rate of discharge at the outlet of the flood plain. Annual variations in the relationship between gauge height and rate of discharge at the outlet are interpreted in terms of a correlation between early wet-season rainfall and seed germination On the flood plain. The daily volume of water on the flood plain can be used to estimate the dilution and subsequent evapoconcentration of any waterborne contaminants that may be transported by Magela Creek from the mine site downstream to the flood plain. The model was validated by testing its ability to predict the measured daily water depth at the outlet channel; comparison of prediction with 12 years' data produced an average error of about 16%.

INTRODUCTION T h e R a n g e r u r a n i u m m i n e in A u s t r a l i a ' s N o r t h e r n T e r r i t o r y is l o c a t e d close to M a g e l a C r e e k (Fig. 1), a w a t e r c o u r s e in w h i c h w a t e r flows o n l y in the wet season. S o m e 12 k m d o w n s t r e a m f r o m the m i n e site the creek enters its associated f l o o d p l a i n s y s t e m which, in a typical year, has a n i n u n d a t e d area of a b o u t 200 k m 2. T h e w e t l a n d s o f the f l o o d p l a i n region are rich in n u m b e r s o f species of a q u a t i c a n i m a l s a n d p l a n t s a n d f o r m p a r t of K a k a d u N a t i o n a l Park. W a s t e w a t e r f r o m the m i n e site c a n enter the surface w a t e r s y s t e m either b y discharge or b y seepage f r o m r e t e n t i o n p o n d s or the tailings i m p o u n d m e n t structure. A s s e s s m e n t s of the p o t e n t i a l i m p a c t of such d i s c h a r g e s o n

166

Mudginbenl Conidor

A

H n / v y

Gauging station Pltiograph Catchment boundary Escarpment

Fig. 1. Magela Creek catchment and flood plain.

the ecosystem and on Aboriginal food gathering activities are being undertaken. As part of these assessments a suitable hydrological model of Magela Creek and its associated flood plain is needed to enable estimates to be made of the effects of dilution and evapoconcentration on the constituents of any water originating from the mine. Such a model has been published for Magela Creek (Vardavas, 1988); in the present paper a hydrological model for the Magela flood plain is described.

167

The model has been validated by examining its ability to predict the measured daily water depth above the flood plain's outlet levee for the twelve years for which full data sets are available; it does so successfully, with an average error of 16%, using a single set of nine parameters selected by optimising the agreement between measured and model water depth for only four of those years. The model provides daily estimates of the volume of surface water on the flood plain and the discharge rate at the outlet channel. The results indicate that there is a correlation between early wet season rainfall and channel roughness, i.e. density of vegetation cover (or standing crop) lining the bed and banks of the outlet channel.

M A G E L A FLOOD PLAIN

Magela Creek flood plain, shown in Fig. 1, covers an area of about 200 km 2 and receives water from the surrounding lowlands ( ~ 780 km 2) and from the Magela Creek catchment ( ~ 600 km 2) upstream of gauging station GS821009. The region's climate is monsoonal with a distinct wet season commencing, on average, in November and ending in April. The dry season, extending from May to October, experiences less than 5% of the annual average rainfall. The average annual rainfall is about 1550 mm while the average annual evaporation rate is about 2000 mm (Vardavas, 1987). Magela Creek begins to flow about a month after the commencement of the wet season and flow ceases by the end of April. The wet-season flow on the flood plain is high during floods but outside flood periods water moves very slowly over the flood plain because of its low gradient, wide expanse and dense aquatic vegetation. The flood plain discharges into the East Alligator River usually over the months February to July, but water can persist in some swamps, and depressions at the edge of the plain and several billabongs (deep pools) are permanent. These surviving waterbodies play a vital role in the ecology of the area by providing water through the dry season for land animals, large numbers of water birds, fish and other aquatic organisms. The amount of water and number of waterbodies remaining on the flood plain during the dry season varies markedly from year-to-year, depending on annual rainfall and the length of the wet season. The flow out of the flood plain is impeded by Oryza grasslands and Melaleuca open forest and woodland at the outlet, while upstream towards the Mudginberri Corridor the flow is impeded by Hymenachne and Pseudoraphis grasslands. The western central arms of the plain are covered by Eleocharis sedgelands and swamps (e.g. Finlayson, 1986). In a recent publication, Hart et al. (1986) reported the nutrient and trace metal fluxes carried by Magela Creek to the flood plain and concluded that

Once the store below this alluvium layer has been filled to capacity. their initial dilution and subsequent evapoconcentration.Qo Soil Stores t p Groundwcoter Store 7 G Fig. This surface store consists of the many depressions. at the major 'inlet' to the flood plain (see Fig. -019B and -017). U. V. and the input runoff contribute to the water filling up the storage D at the surface. the water depth at the outlet is monitored by gauging station GS821019. Vd J F Wedge Store T . These provide the input runoff Qr = Q m + Q] to the flood plain which itself provides a catchment of about 200 km 2 for direct rainfall P. The volume of water that is transported to the flood plain determines the amount of heavy metals on waterborne material. Part of the rainfall is intercepted by the vegetation cover on the plain while any excess rainfall. becomes negligible and the surface store is rapidly filled up by Qr and U. Rainfall onto the flood plain is monitored by three pluviographs (R821019A.168 P Interception Store MogelOcotchmentCreek Qr Lowlonds Catchment IQi [ JU Surfoce Store D . F. 2. while the discharge of water from the Magela Creek catchment is monitored by gauging station GS821009. L. Prism Store H . The flood plain system is considered to comprise two feeder catchments. most of the heavy metal transport occurs during high flow periods and that it is largely associated with particulate matter. MATHEMATICAL MODEL A flow diagram of the model is given in Fig. the infiltration. Vp . 1). that of Magela Creek and of the lowlands surrounding the plain. Flood plain water flow model. stores created by levees and a high porosity uppermost alluvium layer on the flood plain. beyond the capacity of this interception store. Water in excess of the capacity of the . 2.

i i '. flS....i)i. .. 4 8 ' '~ ' 12 "'i 16 '. of the water at the outlet defines the amount of water on the flood plain held in prism-storage. 1987). H. The water surface corresponds to a flood which occurred in February 1980. water in excess of the surface store capacity. of this backwater store to reach the plain's outlet each day. and groundwater or base flow. that is. 3.' 2~ ' ~ 24from "". 7G. f 36 (kin) " downstreom GS821009 . Vw.. ii. In Fig. 28 " i 32 . at the outlet is constrained b y a channel which is about 5 km wide and b y the levee which forms the base of the channel. Because of the travel time to the outlet... Hence the soil and groundwater stores are saturated and are not expected to significantly affect the water budget of the flood plain and hence the contribution of interflow (flS) and base flow ('fG) to surface water storage is ignored as is infiltration ( F ) from the surface store down to the estuarine muds. Discharge. Longitudinal cross-section along the centre of the flood plain.169 14 12 \ \w ~ '.. water entering the flood plain can be sufficiently delayed for the water surface to develop a significant average slope in excess of that arising from the slope of the flood plain surface. but with zero backwater component. In the present model this travel time is effectively incorporated as a time delay by allowing only a fraction.. ' i 4-0 4-4 Distance Fig.. 3.ii!i iiil.. Vdm. •. ~ _1 C3 "1. which is part of the surface store in the present model.< 6 2 0 iiii!iii !i!i!iiii ii i i i " " '. Vp.. 3 these three flood plain stores are depicted on a longitudinal section . flows downstream to the plain's outlet. Below the alluvium layer is an = 10-m layer of blue-grey estuarine muds.5-1 m thick and has a high infiltration capacity. The depth. I oter Surface 2 3 - Wedge Prism Surfoce Store Store Store ... The uppermost alluvial layer. This layer lies above a sandy alluvium layer of about 20 m thickness (East. is referred to as wedge-storage in Fig. This backwater. Qo. is about 0. surface store plus any lateral subsurface water movement or interflow.~- 10 m ~. : .

Vp = Vw = 0 and d V p / d t = d V w / d t = 0.l ) represents the daily net water input to the flood plain and Qo the discharge out of the flood plain then the conservation equation for the total water volume can be written as: dVT/dt = Qin . The inundated surface area when the surface-store is filled to capacity. Thus. out of the flood plain. Once the surface-store is full and there is discharge.Qo (6) .n = Qr + A o( U . The example of the water surface shown corresponds to a storm event which started on 4 February 1980 (Uranium Province Hydrology. The surface store capacity. is: d V p / d t = KVw . and U is the rainfall not intercepted by the vegetation canopy.e. Vp and Vw are the volumes in the surface-store. Water conservation equations The total volume of above surface water on the flood plain. is given by: VT: Vd+ Vp+ Vw (1) where Vd. is taken to be the base area A 0 of the flood plain.~Vw (5) and the conservation equation for the prism-store volume. i. Since the wedge-store loses water to prism-storage at a rate •V w (m 3 d -1) then the conservation equation for the wedge-store volume. is then given by: d V d / d t = Q. Vd. then Vd = Vdm. Vdm.e. 1982). Qo. and V = Vp + Vw is given by: d V / d t = Qr + A ( U - ET) -.170 taken along the centre of the flood plain (Uranium Province Hydrology.Qo (4) where A (m 3) is the inundated area and A > A 0.Qo (2) While the surface store is filling up there is no discharge out of the flood plain. If Qin ( m3 d .ET) (3) where E T is the daily evapotranspiration rate (m d . prism-store and wedge-store. from equation (2) the conservation equation for the surface-store volume. Qo = 0. defines the volume of water held on the flood plain before there is discharge above the outlet levee. Vp. where A 0 ~ 200 km 2. can be written as: d V w / d t = Qr + A ( U E I ) . i. respectively. d V d / d t = 0. 1980).l ) . VT (m3). when Vd = Vdm. Vw.

assumed to be constant. 4. can A = A 0 + 2 L 0 ( H + T ) / t a n q. and the average width b of the inundated flood plain is given by b = ~b0. I n u n d a t e d surface area The surface area A inundated by water can be computed by adopting an average vertical cross-section for the flood plain as shown in Fig. where L 0 represents the effective length of the flood plain. The inundated surface area when the surface store is filled to capacity. the inundated with Vd so that A = ~ A 0 with prism-storage depth. i. is assumed to simply increase = D I D m. T. The inundated area when the wedge-storage depth. A.e.01 ( U r a n i u m Province Hydrology. 1980) while the mean width bo ~ 4 km and since A 0 --. . H. Vv.200 km 2 then L 0 ~ 50 km. and so now: =A/A o = 1 + 2(H+ T ) / ( b o tan ~) (8) (9) More generally: = D/D m + 2(H+ T ) / ( b o tan ~) (10) with D < Dm. and the be written as: and because of levees and depressions in area. is given by A 0 = b o L o. on the flood plain is given by VT = a c L o.171 b /!i/~i!i bo Fig. If a c represents the cross-sectional area delimited by the water surface of width b and the surface of the plain then the total volume. The vertical cross-section of the base of the flood plain is taken to be u-shaped. 4. are non-zero. Average vertical cross-section of the flood plain adopted in the model. when D = Din.---0. The volume of water held in surface storage can be written in terms of the average water depth D as: Vd = A o D (7) the surface store . For the Magela Creek flood plain tan q. and the banks have an average slope tan ~.

is set equal to Yam. Vd. vd = V d / A o . where E T is the daily evapotranspiration rate.172 Surface storage The input to the surface store consists of catchment runoff Q r ( m3 d . After the drying phase L i = L. The conservation equation for the wedge-storage can be written in terms of the characteristic wedge-store depth vw = V w / A o as: d v w / d t = d v e / d t . Equation (14) can be easily solved for day i if written in the form: Udi = Udi_ 1 q.L m (12) If U > 0 then the interception storage becomes L~ = Era.xv w = f (16) . whereas if U < 0 then U is set to zero. The conservation equation for the surface-store volume. or volume per unit area A0. the rate at which water is transferred to wedge-storage is given by: dve/dt= R + ~( U ET) where now ~ is given by equation (9). is then given by: d V d / d t = Qr + A o ( U - ET) (13) Equation (13) can be re-written in terms of the characteristic depth.a ) and a fraction of the direct rainfall. The interception store is computed as in Vardavas (1988) based on a quick wetting phase followed by a slower evaporation phase. If Vd~> Odin then the excess water Ave = Vd~. P (m d . onto the flood plain catchment area A 0.A t ( u i q. as dvd/dt = R + UEv = u (14) where R = Q i n / A o with vd = D. . After the wetting phase the interception store on day i is given by: Li = Li-a + Pi (11) Any rainfall U in excess of the interception storage capacity L m flOWS down to the surface store. _ a ) / 2 (15) with the conditions that Vd0 = 0 at t = 0 and va~ _< Udm with At = 1 day. in excess of the interception store L provided b y the vegetation canopy.a ) .U . where: Ui = n i .Udm is transferred to wedge-storage and Vd. W e d g e a n d prism storage Once the surface store is full.E T and if Li < 0 it is set to zero.

R a p h s o n iteration at each time step to obtain vw and Vw~ and h e n c e / / s and Ti. ) ] and % = H[1 + H / ( b o tan q~)] (19) (20) The coupled equations equations (16) and (18) can be re-written in the Euler-trapezoidal form for day i: Vw.exp(-K1R~2)] (17) where x0. 4: Vw= r [ 1 + (T + 2H)/(bo tan . + At ( f + f . The conservation equation for the prism-storage can be written in terms o f Up = V p / A 0 a s : d v p / d t = x ( R ) v w . In the next section we shall see that the modified flood plain discharge q = Q o ( H . when R >> 1 then x ~ 1.-.173 where x represents the fraction of backwater or wedge-storage lost to prism-storage per day and is a function of runoff R.i~(Vw)~ET = g (18) where 8(Vw) is the Dirac delta function defined by: 8(Vw )( = 1 =0 for for Vw= 0 VwV~0 and is introduced to ensure that once the wedge-storage.-1 + At (gi + g i . representing the rapid transfer of all the backwater to prism-storage by a massive flood.%)[1 . The variation of x with R was thus of the form: x ( R ) = ~0 + (1 .1 ) is a function of the prism and wedgestorage water depths or heads H and T which in turn are related to vp and Vw. representing decay of the wedgestorage in the absence of any runoff input to the flood plain.= Vw.q . Outlet channel discharge In order to obtain a relationship between gauge height and discharge at the floodplain outlet channel. is depleted then evapotranspiration removes water from the prism-storage. which overlays the prism-storage. From Fig. T ) / A o (m d . Theoretically. The function x ( R ) was chosen so that when R = 0 then x = x0. = %. xl and x 2 are model parameters which need to be selected through model optimisation. given the initial conditions Vd0 = Vw0= 0 at t = 0.a ) / 2 (21) and these together with equations (19) and (20) can be easily solved using N e w t o n . _ l ) / 2 %. the theory of discharge from a simple channel .

g. chapter 4): u = c ( p s . Qo. 1966.47 × 10 -3 hence n = 21. Manning's n (m ~/3 s) in terms of q0 is given by: n =/3oS~/2/qo . For the Magela Creek flood plain S o -. An idealised sketch of the Magela floodplain outlet channel is shown in Fig. ) 1/2 (23) where p = a l p . qo =/3o8~/2/rt and qa = a l S o L. see Henderson.. m = 5 / 3 . The channel is wide and essentially rectangular with a = H/30 and /3o = 4. Since the depth of water H at the outlet channel is of the order of 1 m then p = H and the Chezy factor C is given by Manning's equation: C = pl/6/n = H 1 / 6 / n (24) where n (m -1/3 s) is Manning's channel roughness factor (Henderson. Henderson (1966) gives n . The discharge at the outlet. 3) while the wedge-storage slope is parameterised by S w -.! (27) (26) and so for the Magela Creek flood plain /30=4-8 k m = 4 8 0 0 m and S~/2 = 4. Sf. p = 2 H +/30 is the wetted perimeter of the channel of average width /30.174 is explored and a more general form for the discharge is obtained suitable for the flood plain's outlet. 5.a T / L o. For a channel with thickly vegetated banks and bed.5/q o (m -1/3 s). so that Sf = S o + a T / L o.2 × 10-5 (see Fig.64 × 104 s d -1.0 . The total energy slope. 3 for slow flow through very tall grasses ( > 30 cm) and hence we expect qo to have a value of about 70: . consists of the floodplain bed slope S o and the wedge-storage slope Sw. can be written in terms of the vertical water cross-section a of the outlet channel as: Qo = aU (22) where U is the discharge velocity which can be expressed as a function of the total energy slope Sf via the semi-empirical Chezy Equation (e. and using equations (22) to (24) the discharge Qo (m 3 d -1) can then be written as: Qo = c0 H/30 ( H 1 / 6 / n )( H S f ) I / 2 = coHS/3(/3oS~/2/n )(1 + a T / S o L o ) 1/z which has the more general form: Qo = CoqoHm( 1 + q l T ) 1/2 where c o = 8.8 km. 1966).

i i? :: 1i '. . \ i~ 3. .i i! i. . 5. . Longitudinal section and cross-section of the outlet channel of the flood plain and typical water levels at the channel and East Alligator River.... J iiii. The outlet channel's bed is a levee at 3.. ...< 3... : .8 vE 3. i i i ill. ./ ! : : i t i i :-:"~i~". - 0 0 i:.. . i 0 2 4 Distonce 6 (kin) 8 10 10 8 E 6 co _/ c3 "I- 4 iiiil!iiil!i!i i i!!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!i!iii!i i i ! ili!!!iil i 0 I Distonce 2 across 3 outlet 4 channel 5 (kin) 6 .34 m A H D (Australia Height Datum). . . . ."".2 . ~ > • ':~ :::~' :: :. :. . ~3 -= o 1 --. 150 Day i i • [ 30 60 90 120 180 210 240 270 Fig... Outlet levee East Alligator river 5 .6 _o ' . ..175 3. . 21'..64 m A H D (see Fig. . " ~ ~ : i ! ... -.4 7. . The daily water depth Hg at the outlet channel has been recorded by the Water Division of the Northern Territory Department of Mines and Energy since 1974 using a gauging board whose zero is at 2.. ..

3 m. 6.6 1. respectively (see Fig. . Measured gauge height (m) versus discharge (m3 s -a) at outlet channel together with regression curve. the discharge will be higher for a given value of Hg than when the plain is gently draining out at the outlet.3) 6) is also shown. Further. and these are shown in Fig.8 2.2 ~c 2 o o 8 ~ o 1. usually a few per wet season. A two variable regression curve (Q = 2.176 2.4 ~= 2. and it can be seen that the river does not impede significantly the flood plain's outflow above the levee. While there is backwater on the plain. 6. 5) so that the prism-storage head H = Hg . because of backwater storage on the flood plain.29 H 6 = 2. 5 correspond to the measured gauge height at gauging stations GS821019 and GS821041 located at the levee and b e y o n d the levee near the river. with day 1 corresponding to 1 N o v e m b e r 1984.29 ( H + 1. 6. 1).6 / o j o E 2.4 1. Qo ( = 50% error) versus gauge height have been made by the N. The water levels shown in Fig.3 m any outflow from the flood plain is confined to a few narrow channels ( = 10 m 2) leading to the East Alligator River and the flow is subject to tidal influence. Below Hg = 1.T. any seasonal variations in the channel roughness due to variations in the density of vegetation will also modify the discharge-gauge height relationship and produce the type of scatter shown in the measurements on Fig. the discharge-gauge height rating curve will be in reality a complex loop-rating curve determined b y the total energy slope Sf. Water Division over the 10 years 1975-85.2 i I I I I I I 0 200 4-00 600 Discharge 800 (rn3s -1) 1000 1200 1400 Fig. The daily average levels shown correspond to an above average Wet season. The measurements shown correspond to data obtained over a number of years. however.1. Estimates of the outflow.

Thus using the rainfall on the lowlands the runoff Q~ on day i was calculated from: Qli = Qlci.177 MODEL OPTIMISATION Input data The input data for the model are the average daily rainfall P recorded by the four pluviographs (R821009A. 1. The true free-water surface evaporation. The daily discharge Qm is measured by the Water Division at GS821009 while the discharge Q1 must be estimated. The other input data to the model are the daily gauge height Hg = H + 1. The measured daily discharge Qm at the flood plain inlet. For low cumulative rainfall (over a time period) most of the rain will go into infiltration and evaporation while for very high rainfall the evaporation process is the dominant loss mechanism which determines runoff (e. -019B and -019A) whose location is shown in Fig.Qlci-1 (30) with Ec a model parameter to be selected by optimisation of an objective function. is also required and so is the runoff Q1 from the surrounding lowlands. the runoff coefficient will be determined by the temporal and spatial variations in the rainfall. -017.E c / P c ] (29) where the parameter E c is a measure of evaporation and Pc is the cumulative rainfall. The following simple expression for the cumulative runoff is thus used to obtain an estimate of the daily runoff from the lowlands: Q. One method is to assume that the average daily runoff coefficient (runoff/rainfall) of the lowlands is the same as that of the Magela Creek catchment and so: Ql = ( A . For the Magela Creek catchment Ec = 1.3 m recorded at the flood plain outlet channel by GS82019 and monthly averaged daily pan evaporation Ep. However. E. / A m ) Q m (28) where A a and A m are the surface areas of the lowland and Magela Creek catchments. As Pc increases the runoff coefficient tends to unity while as E c increases the runoff coefficient increases more slowly. Pilgrim.c = AIPc e x p [ .5 m gave good agreement between the measured and estimated monthly runoff and reasonable agreement in the daily runoff. representing the runoff from the Magela Creek catchment upstream of GS821009. 1983). was evaluated from E = p c E p with the monthly lake-to-pan coefficients . by evapotranspiration and by the physical features of the catchment.g.

3 m. In the present model re is selected as a model parameter between 0.07 and 0. . Parameter selection The model parameters are as follows: Dm Lm /¢0. 1988). and the model prism-storage head H are minimised. which is the quantity that needs to be minimised. ~.e.3 m).12.12 for rice lands or areas where paddies dominate.07 is the free-water surface albedo to solar radiation and re is the flood plain albedo to solar radiation.1. Objective function The model involves ten parameters which determine the volume of surface water on the flood plain. These parameters are selected so that the differences between the measured gauge height H 0 ( = Hg . was taken to be the average relative error between the two profiles Ho(t ) and H(t) over the wet season: where A = I H 0 .10 for the flood plain. Henderson-Sellers and Wilson (1983) give r = 0. The evapotranspiration rate E T over the flood plain was evaluated from: ET =( 1--rf \l_rw)E (31) (see Vardavas. As will be shown later re = 0. i.16 but it is expected that re for the flood plain will have a value close to 0.H I / H o over the N days of measurements. where r w = 0. for the parameter ranges shown in Table 1. when Ho(t ) > O. 1989) which minimised the objective function c (equation 32). The objective function. K1 a n d I¢2 q0.178 for the region taken from Vardavas (1987). measured above the tidal level (ATL) or levee level which forms the outlet channels bed at Hg = 1. m and ql Ec rf surface storage capacity interception storage capacity constants which determine x (equation 17) constants which determine Q0 (equation 26) constant which determines Q1 (equation 29) floodplain albedo to solar radiation (equation 31) The parameters were selected b y using an iterative Fibonacci search technique (Vardavas.

24 0.47 0. The parameter re.093 5.0-2.5 0 m -1.16 for tropical woodlands (Henderson-Sellers and Wilson.07 for a free-water surface to 0.83 0.13 0.021 Mean sensitivity g 4. The parameter m was expected to be near to the theoretical value of 5 / 3 and so the range was taken to be 0 . on field measurements. 1983) so the range was taken to be 0.91 0. was taken to be between 0 .030 Mean value 68.16 0.030 m based on the 0. which is a power index in equation (17).22 0. the interception storage capacity L m w a s taken to be within the range 0. varies from about 0. The model parameters were first optimised b y matching the model and measured gauge height (m ATL) for the 1978-79 wet season and the optimal .07-0.522 1.1 / 3 s) for channels lined by tall grasses. Finally.07-0.011 1.003 0.88 0.16 0.01 Each parameter was constrained within a range of values based. q0 should be about 70 and so the constraining range was taken to be 10-200 (m 4/3 s-1 if r n = 5 / 3 in equation 26).005-0.65 1.2 1-10 0.41 0.16. 5 / n is inversely proportional to Manning's channel roughness factor n which takes a value of about 0 .094 0.25 0. The surface storage capacity parameter D m w a s taken to be between 0 .57 3.60 0.2 .49 0.3 while x0 was taken to lie between 0-0. 3.05 SE N/ qo ( m4/3 s . 1988).005-0.21 2.l ) m E c (m) ql ( m . 3 we expect the slope to be steeper near the plain's inlet so the range was chosen to be 0 .11 0. The range for parameter Eo was taken to be 1. For the Magela Creek floodplain cutlet which is lined by tall grasses. where possible.058 0. 1988).77 33.12 0.007-m value for the Magela Creek catchment (Vardavas.69 0. 3 ( m .5-m value for the Magela Creek catchment.179 TABLE 1 M o d e l p a r a m e t e r values a n d sensitivity Parameter Constraining range 10--200 0-2 1-2 0-50 0-1 1-3 0-0.14 0. Parameter ql for an idealised triangular shaped wedge-storage from inlet to outlet would be about 2 b u t from Fig.1 value for the Magela Creek catchment (Vardavas. The parameter q0 = 2 1 .0 m based on the 1. which represents the albedo of the flood plain to solar radiation.003 0.8 1. in particular b y Oryza.2 based on the 0.11 0.35 0.77 0.04 0.4 0.1 m based on the longitudinal cross-section given in Fig.147 4.l ) D m (m) x2 Ko x1 rf L m (m) 12.01 0.07 0. The parameter x2.09 0.

is also shown in Table 1.07. A high sensitivity of the objective function to the parameter m.10. The mean parameter vector ~ for the four years and the mean sensitivity vector where then evaluated from: 4 4 fi=~EP.10. can be obtained from: AEj= ejsJpj. are given in Table 1 in decreasing order of mean sensitivity g together with the standard error (SE) in each parameter.83 which supports the hypothesis of a strong seasonal variation in Manning's n or q0. i. P3 and P4. thus establishing ' m o d e l verification'. respectively. i=1 and g=¼Esi i=1 (33) Here each element sij of the vector s i was obtained from: s. Model validation In Table 2 are given the values of the objective function e which corresponds to the relative error between model and measured gauge height (m ATL). then an estimate of the resultant mean fractional error Acj in the objective function.06 and 0. 1980-81 and 1981-82.180 parameter vector was denoted by Pl. 0. If ej is the standard error in the m e a n value of fij. The values of c corresponding to p~ through to P4 where 0. corresponding to parameter j. The largest sensitivity corresponds to the parameter q0. This is not unexpected since n will vary from season to season depending on the density of the vegetation which lines the banks and bed of the flood plain's Outlet channel. Stra~kraba and Gnauck.g. which determines discharge from the flood plain. 1985). (35) F r o m Table 1 we see that Aq = 0. respectively.j= (AqJqj)/(ApiJp~j) (34) where Aeij is the error in the objective function q j evaluated with ApiJp. e. an error analysis reveals that the error in the value of q0 due to averaging over the four Wet seasons results in a large error in the objective function. The elements of fi and ~. and which varies inversely with Manning's channel roughness factor n. 0.e. hence 1974 corresponds to the wet season November 1974 to July 1975. .This will be discussed further in the next section.Optimal parameter vectors were then obtained for the wet seasons 1979-80. which also determines the discharge.j = 0. In column one are the years which correspond to the beginning (November) of each wet season. the model is capable of fitting the measurements of a given season with reasonable accuracy (e. However. denoted by P2.07.

16 In column two are given the values of e with all parameters optimised for that particular year's gauge height.05 0.13 0.11 0.37 0.12 0.06 0.40.07 0.07 0.10 0.21 0.181 TABLE 2 Model objective function values m Year 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Mean • 0. in particular the value of q0 is fixed to q0 = 68. i.09 0.10 0.21 0.10 0.0. indicated by an asterisk.19 0.08 0.15 0.19 0.18 0.10 0.8.11 0.18 0.07 0. rainfall from the beginning of the Wet season up to the end of December say) to show some correlation with Manning's n or q0.09 0. q0 should be inversely proportional to PeThe early wet season rainfall.06 0.The expectation is that Manning's channel roughness (or flow impedance) will increase with Pe. varies from one year to the next and that its magnitude is determined by the growth of vegetation in the outlet channel.09 0.18 0. with the 12-year mean value given in the last row. 7 for each year. is shown in Fig. Clearly there is an inverse relationship between q0 and Pe" It is interesting to note that the two recent E1 Nino years.12 0.16 0.15 0. a correlation was sought between some meteorological quantity and vegetation density or standing crop. As can be seen the mean value of e(q0) is about 0.13 •(qo(Pe)) 0.20 with individual year values reaching -. In column 3 the error e is evaluated using the 4-year mean parameter values of Table 1.08 0.14 0. correspond to unusually dry years with higher than usual values of q0 . given in Table 1.07 0.e.15 0.16 0. and optimising the value of q0 for each year. Based on the expectation that n. Since seed germination will determine the density of grasses growing in the bed and banks of the outlet channel and because this must occur early in the Wet season before the flood plain is inundated then we expect that the early wet season rainfall Pe (i.e.15 0. Also shown is the variation in q0 obtained by keeping all other model parameters fixed to the 4-year mean values.17 0.18 0.32 0. recorded at the outlet channel by pluviograph R821019A. Pe (cm). and hence q0.10 0.20 •(qo) 0.10 0.18 0.28 0.10 0.18 0.08 •(qo) 0.18 0.

...In Fig. . 7. for each year..0.182 70 . Model parameter q0 (inversely proportional to Manning's channel roughness factor n) correlation with early wet season rainfall Pe- preceded by years of unusually low values of qo.43qo 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 Year 84 85 86 87 120 100 0 80 0 0 ~- 60 40 20 0 0 i i r t I I I I 1 O0 200 300 400 500 600 700 Early Wet S e a s o n Rainfall ( r a m ) 800 Fig. pe(cm) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 I I I I I I I I I I I * El Nino Years ..1 -. There is a statistically significant (correlation coefficient 0.171P e (36) In column 4 of Table 2 are given the error values e(q0) with q0 optimised for each year keeping all other parameters fixed to the 4-year mean values given in Table 1. 7 is also shown a regression line drawn through the optimised qo values. It should be noted that the c(q0) values obtained with all other parameters fixed to the 12-year mean values were found not to differ significantly from those using the 4-year averages....- . corresponding to different early wet season rainfall values.94) decreasing variation in q0 versus P¢ with the regression line given by: qo(Pe) = 128.

The vegetation density (or standing crop) at the flood plain's outlet channel will be 2 1.40 0 60 120 180 240 `300 0 60 120 Day 180 24-0 3QO 0 60 120 18Q 24-0 . There were no Pe measurements for the years 1974 and 1975.2 . ' 19.183 The error values c(q0(Pe) ) obtained using the above linear relationship..2 . equation (36).Model Measured 1975--76 1976--77 . • i .c: 2 1.8a~ .2 1980-81 1981--82 1982--83 -~ ~ ~ . i i .. Gauge height above the outlet levee (above tidal level.6 1.8 1974-75 . ~)~ 1977-78 1978-79 1979--80 f .. i ~ ..6 1.4 0 2 1. The quantity q0 can now be removed from the model parameters as it can be reasonably estimated from the early wet season rainfall. ..6 1. i .8 E I .300 Fig. The model values were generated using the average parameter set for the 4 years 1977-1981. < .8 . are given in column 5 of Table 2.8 . ATL) as a function of time m days from the 1 November. . ~. i . 1984--85 1985--86 . 8.2 .6 1.4 13 2 1.

x 200 o c _c 100 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 Day 24.184 proportional to Manning's n which from equation (36) can be estimated from: n = 21.0 270 300 330 360 Fig. 9.1 0. Observed flood plain inundation between 12 March and 14 March 1973 and model inundated flood plain area as a function of days after the 1 N o v e m b e r 1973.171Pe) (37) - 300 E .5/(128. .

185 Manning's n varies from about 0. the model was able to adequately predict the daily discharge for these two years.1380 km2). 1979. T. shown for the above four wet seasons in Fig. Note that A decreases smoothly due to evaporation loss during the dry season. 1980-81 and 1983-84. 10. The prism-storage depth. It can be clearly seen that in mid-March (about day 130) there is a rapid rise in A from about 130 km 2 to 200 km 2. the inundated area increases by little as the water rises up relatively steeper banks (see Fig. 9. averaged over the four years 1978-81. FLOOD PLAIN HYDROLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS Some of the typical hydrological characteristics of the Magela Creek flood plain are given in Fig. the backwater or wedge-storage depth. as shown in Fig. 10a-d for the four wet seasons 1974-75. There were no Pe records for the two years 1974 and 1975. The model was further validated by its ability to predict the variation in the inundated area. The model generates the daily prism-storage water depth. 4). H. the depth associated with the surface storage. 1980 and 1981. Between 12 March and 14 March 1973 the inundated area on the flood plain increased by about 60%. The rainfall period begins around November while the runoff onto the flood plain begins about January and on average both last until May. 8 for twelve wet seasons from 1974-75 to 1985-86 with day 1 corresponding to 1 November. The flood inundation maps were produced largely from helicopter sightings by the Water Division of the Northern Territory (Christian and Aldrick. A. given in Table 1. H. 1977-78. Once the surface store is filled to capacity. which represents the depth of water above the levee . A. It can be seen that the direct rainfall onto the flood plain ( ~ 200 km 2) is small compared with the runoff from its catchment areas (-. 1977). for the wet season 1972-73. in agreement with the values given in Henderson (1966) for channels covered by tall grasses (height > 30 cm). although using the mean value of q0.2 during unusually dry wet seasons to about 0. The comparison between model and measured daily gauge height (m ATL) measured as water depth above the outlet channel's bed is given in Fig. Below the two maps is the model's calculated inundated area. The model is thus validated by its ability to adequately predict the measured daily gauge height for the four years 1978. before and after a storm event in March 1973. This corresponds to a rapid filling up of the flood plain's surface store D. and D. using the one set of nine model parameters and by its ability to predict the daily gauge height for the following four years 1982-85 and the preceding two years 1976-77.5.

.E 1. I i I .3.. D o-1.300 360 Day 1. with the surface storage 400 1974--75 Rainfall input R u n o f f input .. P 0 300 ~n 250 200 & 15o o 100 F.5 g.. 50 0 60 120 180 24-0 .6 .5 m for an unusually wet season.... I h I .¢ J.. The prism and surface storages are the dominant storages on the flood plain.186 varies from an average of about 0. Model H Measured H i .4 ' 6'0 120 180 240 300 360 Day 0 60 120 180 24-0 300 360 Day 2.2 1.H .2 '6 ..b .300 E E 200 100 0 2 ~. .5 Total s t o r a g e Prism plus wedge storage 2 vE e 1.5 m during a drier than usual Wet season to about 1.. r ...5 Gauge 1... 10a. Flood plain hydrological characteristics for the wet season beginning 1 N o v e m b e r 1974...1 214- Fig..8 height 2 t (m) ..J.. o 1 / Y .

5 o 2oo _~ • .4 A F: A__ . 10b...5 Lo o 1 .2 .2 Measured -= 1 ~ ~ .6 .4 .8 (m) 2 Fig. Once the rainfall and runoff onto the flood 200 1977--78 Rainfall input Runoff input 1..360 1. ...187 capacity determining the time water begins to discharge at the outlet channel. i .. .50 E E 100 j . T H D 1. ... These three storages determine the total volume of water and the discharge from the flood plain.. F l o o d p l a i n h y d r o l o g i c a l characteristics for the wet s e a s o n b e g i n n i n g 1 N o v e m b e r 1977.4 Couge 1.2 1...6 height 1. .' . 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 60 120 180 240 300 360 Day Total storage Day wedge storage Prism plus "~ 1.J 60 120 180 Day 24-0 300 .... 150 i E ~oo @ 50 . . Model H H o 1.

i E 375 u 250 125 0 60 120 180 2 .2 1. 10c. .8 3.5 storage P r i s m plus wedge storage E 2 ~1. 0 1.6 J~ ..5 o . . 120 180 24E1 300" 360 Day 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Doy Total 3 2. .188 plain cease the backwater storage becomes negligible and the volume of water begins to decrease smoothly as water gently discharges out of the channel. .5 0 625 500 .4" 2. 0 " 3 0 0 ' 3 .6 2 2.4 0 60 S .- H D g 1.Model H H Measured r! .J. .2 . Id [ .J. This can be seen in Fig. 10 where the total volume per unit base 450 1980--81 Rainfall input Runoff input 300 150 o 2 Z1. J J... Flood plain hydrological characteristics for the wet season beginning 1 November 1980.2 Day Gauge height (m) Fig.

.4 0 60 120 180 240 Day 300 360 60 120 180 240 DQy 300 360 2. - 1. O -¢: 1.// f i ~200 ..5 2 1 o 400 ( r 300 fi .2 ~ 100 0 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Day f 1. as can be seen b y the change in the gradient of the storage versus time at about t = 240 days.. area (v v = VT/A o) is given as storage (m).8 Fig. Model H H ./' 1... .6 v T H E Measured . & .. Flood plain hydrological characteristics for the wet season beginning 1 N o v e m b e r 1983....L...2 o • .189 400 1983--84 Roinfc]l[ input Runoff input E' 300 E 200 1 O0 _. 10d.5 Total storage Prism plus wedge storage ~ E 2 w 1.c i.. ... Eventually the discharge stops and the flood plain water is lost by evapotranspiration.6 2 2..4 Gauge height ( m ) 2. L ~ . lIUm ii i i ii i i i ..

During the early part of the Wet season there is the filling up of the surface store until the water level reaches the height of the levee. When runoff ceases at the end of the Wet season.190 which corresponds to about the end of June. the volume is determined by the prism-storage and surface storage as can be seen in Fig. 11 for the twelve wet seasons beginning 1 November 1974 to July 1985. with zero at 2. is always . The higher the influx of water the larger the discharge out of the flood plain for a given gauge height. VOLUME ESTIMATION The volume of water on the flood plain on any given day during the wet season is determined by three hydrological phases.3 m) there is discharge into the East Alligator River (see Fig. H. On average the model and measured prism-storage depth. The peak volume can vary between about 100 × 1 0 6 m 3 during unusually dry years to 500 × 1 0 6 m 3 during unusually wet years with an average peak volume of about 300 × 106 m 3" While there is discharge out of the flood plain the total volume VT -AoD m + V.522 __ 0. Once the water rises above the levee (3. The true discharge-gauge height rating curve is a complex loop curve determined by the influx of runoff onto the flood plain. During this time the volume versus time curve is highly irregular depending on the temporal pattern of water influx onto the plain. permanent stores of water in deep pools or billabongs. 5. prism-storage and backwater or wedge-storage. While there is rainfall and runoff onto the flood plain the volume of surface water is determined by surface-storage. The water volume then decreases smoothly as the flood plain empties into the East Alligator River which is sufficiently below the levee at the flood plain outlet channel so as not to interfere with the flow out of the flood plain. The model also generates the discharge (m 3 s -a) from the flood plain and this is also shown in Fig.058.34 m AHD). 10. differ by about 16% (see Table 2) and the backwater or wedge-storage depth. this was discussed earlier with reference to Fig. The theoretical loop rating curves are in good agreement with the field measurements of the Water Division. Shallow' water can persist on the flood plain until the time of the next monsoons thus supplementing the small. where V is the volume in excess of the surface store and since = 1 then: VT= Ao( H + T + Dm) (38) where from Table 1 the surface storage maximum depth D m = 0. 10 as a function of time and as a function of gauge height Hg (m.64 m AHD or Hg = 1. 5). but ecologically vital. T. The volume generated by the model is shown in Fig.

8 1 wet season the peak volume occurred at about t = 120 days after i N o v e m b e r .0O 30O 2 O O 100 0 1963-84 1984--85 1985-86 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 160 24.191 600 500 400 300 200 1O0 0 600 500 1977-78 1978--79 1979-80 1974.--75 1975-76 1976--77 400 300 200 100 0 ~-" E 600 1980-81 1961-62 1982--63 500 E > 400 300 20O 100 0 6O0 500 4. 11. An estimate of the error in the model's volume can then be obtained from: 'v/-/= + 32(1-7/-/g2 .3Hg + 3.0) 1/2 (39) where Cv/_ is in units of 1 0 6 m 3 and Hg is the gauge height measured by / GS821019 at the flood plain outlet. Model daily variation in the flood plain's surface water volume beginning with 1 November in each wet season. much smaller than H (< 11/3). For example.0 300 360 Day Fig.4. during the 1 9 8 0 .

A quick estimate of the volume of water. The mean error was calculated b y taking the line of best fit of all points which lie above the line defined b y equation (40) and the line of best fit of all points below and averaging the two to obtain the mean dispersion of points above and below equation (40). .0 × 10 -5 (m d -a) with t = 0 now corresponding to the day flow ceases. in agreement with the total volume given b y the model for t = 120 days from 1 N o v e m b e r 1980. after flow ceases at the outlet.334 (40) The above linear relationship for V is based on the 12-year average line of best fit through the storage-gauge height loop rating curves as shown in Fig. can be obtained by using the long-term average variation in ET over the months July to October.8.282 with an error: Err = _+32(2. for Hg = 3 m then Vv = 490 _+ 90 × 106 m 3. 10 we have H ~ 1. 11 a change of slope in the volume versus t curves usually occurs at about 240 days from 1 N o v e m b e r which now corresponds to t = 0 in equation (45).7 m and so H e = 3. decreases b y evapotranspiration according to: dD/dt = --Ev(t ) (44) An estimate of the rate at which D decreases and hence the time. Once water ceases to flow out of the flood plain the volume of water remaining on the flood plain in surface store depth.6 × 10 -3 t - 1.3 ( m ) and b = 2.18 The total volume Vv can be estimated from: Vv = 257Hg .3) 1/2 (43) (42) (41) where CVT ----(C2L + e2n)l/2.9 × 10 -5 t 2 (45) In Fig. For example. D. E v can be approximately expressed as a linear function of time: E T ( t ) = a + bt with a = 4. F r o m Fig.0 m and Vv = 520 _+ 70 × 1 0 6 m 3. 10.5. The mean error in V is given by: EvL = 23He -. V.5 × 1 0 . in excess of the surface store can be obtained from the following simple expression: V = 2 5 7 H g . Thus the flood plain dries up about 100 days after flow ceases at the outlet leaving only isolated swamps areas and billabongs.192 1980. it takes for the flood plain to dry up. Then surface storage depth D decreases according to: D / D m = 1 . usually around early July.2H 2 .1Hg + 3.

Arthur Johnston and Glen Riley for their comments on the . 10. is zero.16 then A Q o / Q o 0. the discharge Qo can be estimated from: Qo ~ qo H5/3 (46) with a relative error A Q o / Q o ~ 5 / 3 A H / H and since the model can predict the value of H with an average relative error of about 0.193 When water input to the flood plain ceases and backwater or wedge-storage depth. A rough estimate for T during the Wet season can be obtained from equations (38) and (40): T = 0.29Hg . i.38 hence T = 0. The model indicates that there is a correlation between early wet season rainfall and water flow impedance provided by vegetation at the outlet. I would like to thank Drs. and the subsequent dilution and evapoconcentration on the flood plain.27.0. CONCLUSION The present water budget model for the tropical Magela flood plain provides an estimate of the daily surface water volume on the flood plain and the rate of discharge from the flood plain outlet in terms of the daily rainfall and daily discharge into the flood plain from Magela Creek.0 m) and using q0 -.29H and using equation (26) with ql = 33. at the end of the wet season. This suggests that there is a correlation between early wet season rainfall and seed germination on the flood plain. T. 1988) can be used to estimate the initial dilution available in the creek for any contaminated waters that m a y be released into the creek from the Ranger uranium mine site.70 (Fig.7 m (Hg ~ 3. John East and Max Finlayson for helpful discussions regarding the Magela Creek flood plain.4 we have: Qo = qoHS/3(1 + 10H) '/a (47) (48) with an average relative error: A Q o / Q o = 5/18 + 5 / / / ( 6 + 6 0 H ) (49) For the peak flow during the 1980-81 wet season H ~ 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is a pleasure to thank m y colleagues Drs.e. 8) then Q0 = 720 _+ 250 m 3 s-1 which compares well with the model value of = 700 m 3 s -1 given in Fig. The flood plain model together with the simple rainfall-runoff model for the Magela Creek system (Vardavas.

Developments in Environmental Modelling. Northern Australia. A Fibonacci search technique for model parameter selection. A. Modelling. Data Summary 1978-79. J. Henderson.. Alligator Rivers Region Research Institute. Canberra.N. 155 pp. 309 pp. Australian Government Publishing Service. Open Channel Flow. 1987. Australian Government Publishing Service.T. Data Summary 1979-81. Hart. Macmillan.C.. REFERENCES Christian.M... Hydrol. Lisa Cannon for computing assistance and Dr. Volume 11. 42: 245-264.M. 1988. Water Division of the Northern Territory Department of Transport and Works. N.T. Surface albedo data for climate modelling. Uranium Province Hydrology.M. Modelling. Space Phys. D. Recycling of nutrients of heavy metals by flood plain vegetation. Modelling.T.H. 142 pp. F. I. Vardavas. 1986.H.F. Rev.M.. A. and Wilson. Henderson-Sellers. 1986. Vardavas.. 1985. M.. and Aldrick. Ottaway.. Freshwater Ecosystems: Modelling and Simulation. Canberra. E.C. In: Annual Research Summary 1985-86. Darwin. 8. Some problems in transferring hydrological relationships between small and large drainage basins and between regions. 1977. Amsterdam..... C.S. Ecol. Late Quarternary evolution of the Magela backwater plain.T. Ecol. 39: 247-268. 4. 252 pp. Finlayson. B. A. 21: 1743-1778.. M. 1983. . A simple water balance daily rainfall-runoff model with application to the tropical Magela Creek catchment. 1980.. 174 pp. Darwin. Modelling.M.194 manuscript. 1966. and Noller. and Gnauck.. Canberra.T. Ecol. New York. Nutrient and trace metal fluxes in the Magela Creek System. Volume 12. A. 1987. Alligator Rivers Study: A review report of the Alligator Rivers Region environmental fact-finding study. A. Vardavas.. Modelling the seasonal variation of net all-wave radiation flux and evaporation in a tropical wet-dry region. Alligator Rivers Region Research Institute. I. 1983. 522 pp. Elsevier.. Pilgrim. B.M.C. Stragkraba. J. 65: 49-72. N. Liz Gyurasits for assisting in the preparation of the manuscript. J. Uranium Province Hydrology. Ecol.. Australian Government Publishing Service. 300 pp. In: Annual Research Summary 1984-85.M.T. I. Water Division of the Northern Territory Department of Transport and Works. C. 1982. Geophys. East.. 1989. 31: 249-265. Series in Engineering. 47 (in press).

- Earth Roads Their Construction and Maintenance 1983
- Leventhal Flentje 2012 Illawarra Type Sections
- Management of Contract Claims
- Gamma Radiation Survey Rockhole Mine
- Rankine Lectures 1981 to 1990
- Report Southern Coalfields Final Jul08
- Water Supply Borehole Construction
- Backfilling Depleted Open Pit Mines
- Foundations in Expansive Soils
- LANDSLIDING OF THE SOUTH COAST RAILWAY –
- Box Culverts - Humes Booklet
- Elements of Soil Mechanics 7th Ed
- Ladd Foott
- Marr, W. a. (State of the Art Practice-Geotechnical Lab Testing)
- Lovell & Johnson (Shear Behaviour of Compacted Saturated Clays)
- Lee and Seed (Drained Strength of Sands)
- Poulos (Liquefaction Evluation Procedure)
- Marachi (Properties of Rockfill Material)
- Leps (Shear Strength of Rockfill)
- Numerical Modelling of Mining Subsidence Upsidence and Valley Closure Using UDEC
- Lambe (Stress Paths)
- Kaiser Et Al GeoEng 2000
- Palmstrom 2006 Use and Misuse of Q(1)
- Limitations of Rock Mass Classification Systems
- RMR - Comprehensive Rock Engineering(1)

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- Technical_Standards_and_Guidelines_for_Planning_and_Design.pdf
- ce2021
- 8 - Estimation of Peak Flood Discharge
- 1(VARAHA)(SUH)
- THE EVALUATION OF THE DESIGN FLOOD HYDROGRAPHS DETERMINED WITH THE HYDROPROJECT METHOD IN THE GAUGED CATCHMENTS
- Flood Frequency Analysis Exercise
- Flood Flow Frequency Analysis
- Irregular Channel
- Design of FC and Other Drainage Structures
- -6726143- Open Channel Flow Ass 2 v 2 Final Ver
- Lecture 34
- ARSET Flood 3Dec13 Week3
- Hydraulic Design Manual
- vrijling10
- Capabilities of Data Integration and Prediction
- Guidelines on Flood Mgmt
- Hyd
- Flood Routing in Natural Channels Using Muskingum Methods
- irc.gov.in.sp.082.2008
- Flood Management 2
- Docvvvuyvuy
- Flood Hydrology of the Waiwhetu Stream Screen Version
- Arroyo Seco Channel Hydraulic Analysis April 2012R
- Flood Warning Systems
- 3-5 What Are Floods
- Modelling flood extent with 3b42 satellite rainfall
- Agustan Subsidence
- Regional Consultation Meetings on Climate Change Adaptation and Water-related Disaster Management - ICHARM-Fukami
- Report NPS Effects of the International Fence ORGAN PIPE CACTUS 200808
- Bulletin17B-FAQ-09-29-05
- A Water Balance Model for the Tropical Magela Flood Plain - Vardava