AND YIElD
DEVELOPMENTS IN WATER SCIENCE, 9
advisory editor
VEN TE CHOW
2 H L. GOLTERMAN
PHYSIOLOGICAL LIMNOLOGY
4 J. J. FRIED
GROUNDWATER POLLUTION
5 N. RAJARATNAM
TURBULENT JETS
6 D. STEPHENSON
PIPELINE DESIGN FOR WATER ENGINEERS
8 J. BALEK
HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES IN TROPICAL AFRICA
RESERVOIR CAPACITY
AND YIElD
The text for this book has evolved from the notes written for a work
shop held at Monash University in May 1975. The format of the workshop, the
first of a series on specific topics in water engineering, was about one
half lectures supported by printed notes, and one half exercises involving
both manual and computer applications ot the theory.
For this text, the printed notes have been revised and expanded, and
the exercises have been replaced by worked examples. Most of the latter have
been worked using the streamflow data of one river, the Mitta Mitta
(Appendix E), chosen because of its median value of variability with respect
to other Australian streams; compared to North American and European data
it would be classed in the high range of variability.
T. A. McMahon, R. G. Mein,
Department of Civil Engineering,
Monash University.
September, 1977.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
CONTENTS
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
2.4 RELEASE 15
2.7 NOTATION 18
3.6 SUMMARY 67
3.7 NOTATION 68
4.6.1 Procedure 83
4.6.2 Practical Considerations 90
REFERENCES 181
INTRODUCTION
In its simplest form the problem being tackled is shown in Fig. 1.1.
It is required to divert water from the stream with flow sequence Q(t) to
meet the demand of perhaps an urban area or of a rural irrigation scheme.
Alternatively it may be necessary to augment the low flow periods of the
river. In any event, the question being posed is: "How large does the
reservoir capacity CC) need to be to provide for a given controlled release
or draft DCt) with an acceptable level of reliability?" Other variations
of this question are possible (such as determining release for a given
capacity) but the basic problem remains unaltered; the relationship between
inflow characteristics, reservoir capacity, controlled release, and relia
bility must be found.
Controlled release
sequence OW
Reservoir with active
SPil~
storage capacity C
The use of more than one reservoir storage to satisfy the demand adds
a significant degree of complication to the problem. The reservoirs may be
on the same stream, different streams, or not on any stream (e.g. pumped
storage). Additional complexity may result from topographical or other
constraints which restrict flow between reservoirs and thus reduce system
flexibility. The multireservoir problem is discussed in Chapter 7.
The methods which can be used for rapid assessment are designated as
preZiminary design techniques. Simplifying assumptions are often made;
for example, releases may be assumed to be constant, evaporation and sedi
mentation losses ignored, the probability of failure may not be considered,
and the seasonal characteristics of the river flows may not be taken into
account. For these preliminary methods, accuracy is reduced for ease of
application.
PROCEDURES BASED
ON DATA GENERATION
GENERAL
OVER YEAR
WITH FREQUENCY FREQUENCY Hazen (1914) Gould (19611
PROBABILITY Sudler (1927) Maass (1962)
Barnes (1954) Guglij (1969)
Rippl (1883) Waitt (1945) Hurst 0951.56.57.6S} Alexander (1962) Thompson l1 950) U.S.G.S. Wilson (1949)
Hurst (1965) Svandze (1964)
King (1920) Fathy & Shukry C1956} Dincer (c1960) Stall (1962) Hardison ('965) Law (1953.55)
Thomas (1963) Gould (1964)
(Sequent peak)
MORAN THEORY
I Melentijevich (1966)
(1967)
CONTINUOUS DISCONTINUOUS
(1976)
TIME TIME
Moran (1956)
I
Gani (1965)
CONTINUOUS DISCONTINUOUS Langbein
Gant & Prabhu (1958.59)
Gani & Pyke (1960.52) ~ VOLUMES                    Hardison (r965)
Moran (1954) Lloyd (1963) Moran (1955) Dearlove & Harris (1965)
Lloyd &. Odoom (1964) Venetis (1969)
more than sixty years ago, it was not until the advent of highspeed
digital computers in the sixties that such procedures became established in
engineering hydrology. Stochastic data generation is the basis of the third
group of storageyield procedures.
It should be noted that many of the methods shown in Fig. 1.2 are
included for only their historical importance in the development of a
particular technique or groups of techniques; they are often impractical
or use unacceptable assumptions in their derivation.
CHAPTER 2
DEFINITION OF TERMS
The time interval required for the inflow data depends on the size of
the storage and on the degree of accuracy required. For small storages
designed to provide water in excess of the river flow for only a month or
two in the year, daily flow data are required. For larger storages, monthly
data are usually adequate to define the variations of streamflow with season
(seasonality), although annual data can often provide sufficiently accurate
results for preliminary design estimates.
As a general rule, monthly data are used for most studies. With this
time interval the data processing time is not excessive, variations in
streamflow and releases throughout the year are adequately accounted for,
and records are readily available. A minor drawback in dealing with monthly
flow volumes is that the calendar months are not equal in length; the effect
of this on storage is small, however, and is usually ignored.
It is also assumed that the data have been checked for homogeneity
and consistency. In this context homoger:eity requires that identical flow
events in a time series are equally likely to occur at all times. Consis
tency requires that there has not been any physical change at the stream
gauging station that might affect the recorded flows. Searcy and Hardison
(1960) discuss this aspect in detail.
* arithmetic mean
n
L x.
1 1
x (2.1)
n
* median
The median is the middle value or the variate which divides the
flow frequency distribution into two equal portions.
27
24
DIAMANTINA RIVER 21
WARRAGAMBA RIVER
6 ~18
~ 5 ~ 15
4
t:
V g:J 12
53 L.t 9
~ 2 6
u. 1 3
O+r~~L~r_~ O~r_r~~~~~~~
o 1 2 3 4 0 2 4 6
Annual flow (xl09 m3 ) Annual flow (xl0 9 m 3 )
8 8
7
MITTA MITTA 7 MEKONG
> 6 RIVER ~ 6 RIVER
g 5 ~ 5
~ 4 5 4
g 3 ~ 3
L.t 2 u. 2
1
04~~r~~~'_~
1 2 3 o 100 120 140 160 180 200
Annual flow (xl0 9 m 3 ) Annual flow (xl0 9 m 3 )
18
16
14 YARRA RIVER 7 BATANG PADANG
~12 ~ 6 RIVER
~10 ~ 5
5 8 :J 4
C'
~ 6 v 3
u. 4 L.t 2
2 1+'
O+r_._~~~~~ O+r_~~~~~~
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 o 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Annual flow (x 10 9 m 3 )
8
7
> 6
g5
~ 4
g 3
L.t 2
1
O~._~._~~~
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
* standard deviation
1 n
s [1
n L (x.1 (2.2)
1 n 2 1
\
[1 ( L x.1  n X2)]2 (2.3)
n
* coefficient of variation
cv (2.4)
* index of variaJ;iUty
1 n
[1
n
L (log 10 x.1 (2.5)
* coefficient of skewness
a
Cs (2.6)
53
n
n
where a
(nl) (n2) L ex.1  x) 3 (2.7)
x 3 _ 3x
(nl~ (n2) [L L x2 + 2nx 3] (2.8)
3 (mean  median)
(2.9)
standard deviation
10
Median I
>
+'
(/) Mean:
s:::
Q)
"'C
>
:!: I
..0
~
..0
o
~
a..
Magnitude Magnitude
(a) (b)
* serial correlation
1 nk 1 nk nk
k
n \ x.l x.l + k  (k)2
L n \ x.l L\ x.l + k
L
(2.10)
nk
~_1_
nk I
x2
i
_
1
standard error of standard (2.12)
s/(2n)"
deviation
River
(Country) Para Annual All Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
meter Months
(Area km 2 )
Diamantina x 7
.  4.5+ 10.1 28.7 '8.1 11.9 6.0 5.4 2.5 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.0
(Australia) C 1.19 2.80 1.82 0.97 1.74 1.62 1.62 2.78 3.21 2.36 1.84 1.96 1.98 2.07
V
(115 000) C 1. 85 4.71 2.63 0.69 2.51 1.67 1.86 3.83 3.97 2.56 1.47 3.06 2.76 2.10
s
r 0.11 0.53 0.33 0.62 0.59 0.91 0.18 0.97 0.71 0.66 0.01 0.40 0.27 0.16
Warragamba x 122  5.2 8.5 10.3 6.8 10.7 15.3 14.0 9.7 5.7 6.8 3.2 3.8
(Aus t Tali a) CV 1.11 2.14 1.60 2.34 2.62 2.28 1. 81 1. 83 1. 58 1.85 1.35 1. 76 1.55 1.72
(8750) C 2.67 4.73 2.76 5.76 4.43 5.58 2.83 2.69 2.74 4.59 2.93 3.85 2.77 3.39
s
r 0.30 0.45 0.20 0.76 0.58 0.20 0.39 0.53 0.53 0.42 0.30 0.57 0.27 0.32
Mi tta Mitta x 270  3.1 2.1 2.4 3.7 4.9 8.1 12.0 15.6 15.6 16.2 10.6 5.7
(Aus t ra1 i a) C 0.57 1.06 0.66 0.58 1.03 1. 74 1.13 1.16 0.87 0.76 0.52 0.56 0.62 0.69
V
(4710) C 1.50 1.91 1.79 1.12 3.27 4.88 4.11 3.17 1.34 1.30 0.88 0.58 0.62 1.72
s 0.06
r 0.71 0.58 0.60 0.54 0.86 0.80 0.63 0.59 0.65 0.73 0.65 0.79 0.61
Mekong x 480  3.2 2.3 2.2 2.1 3.0 6.4 13.0 23.1 20.7 12.7 7.0 4.4
(Thailand/ C 0.17 0.90 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.19 0.30 0.32 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.28 0.30 0.22
V
Laos) C 0.08 1.27 0.14 0.18 0.00 0.20 0.96 0.71 0.49 0.03 0.53 0.47 1.26 0.00
(299 000) s 0.45 0.95
T 0.74 0.89 0.91 0.88 0.86 0.69 0.56 0.62 0.49 0.52 0.50 0.85
Yarra x 538  3.3 1.9 2.0 3.1 5.4 9.0 13.3 15.8 15.6 14.3 9.9 6.4
(Australia) C 0.40 0.99 0.89 0.72 0.74 1.24 1.05 1.03 0.58 0.51 0.48 0.61 0.75 1.11
(334) CV 0.77 1. 78 5.15 3.89 2.29 3.31 2.23 3.52 0.91 0.67 0.83 1.48 1.53 4.11
s
r 0.12 0.62 0.53 0.35 0.36 0.51 0.38 0.59 0.49 0.46 0.44 0.52 0.61 0.36
Bat.ang Padang x 1700  9.6 6.9 6.9 8.3 9.3 7.1 5.9 5.6 6.9 9.43 12.4 11.7
(Malaysia) C 0.18 0.40 0.32 0.27 0.28 0.27 0.29 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.35
V
(378) C 0.60 1.46 1.63 0.70 0.66 0.30 0.32 0.31 0.54 0.35 1.98 0.59 0.77 0.79
rs 0.47 0.60 0.74 0.62 0.75 0.66 0.53 0.47 0.56 0.25 0.58 0.59 0.48 0.71
x
I King
(Australia)
(451)
C
Cs
V
2340
0.19
0.31

0.63
1.64
4.4
0.74
1.19
4.2
0.70
0.84
4.6
0.69
1. 74
8.2
0.39
0.32
9.6
0.54
1.03
10.7
0.58
1.12
11.6
0.35
0.24
12.0
0.42
0.46
11.0
0.39
0.92
9.3
0.45
0.55
7.8
0.49
0.90
6.6
1.11
5.11
r 0.11 0.32 0.16 0.24 0.35 0.03 0.18 0.01 0.44 0.35 0.36 0.41 0.05 0.11
. Mean is expressed as depth of runoff in mm. x is mean; C
v
is coefficient of variation;
tMonth1y flows are expressed as percentage of mean. Cs is coefficient of skewness; r is serial correlation.
13
NORTH AMERICA
25
AUSTRALIA
,"",500 >
E ~ 20
Q)
E :::J
.... 400 a
::t: ~ 15
o u.
300
~
10
OL..LJL..LJL..fIU.L....&.+...L.L.L..L+L~.&..,
25 ~AUSTRAlIA "AUSTRAlIA
>
u 1./ NORTHERN
c: I' HEMISPHERE
~ 20 >
20
CT u
~ c:
Q)
U.
15
g. 15
Q)
~
u.
10
10

5  5
o [ nn,
2 3 0.2 0 +0.2 +0.4 +0.6
Annual coefficient of skewness Annual serial correlation
The active storage of a reservoir is the water stored above the level
of the lowest offtake. It is thus equal to the total volume of water stored
less the volume of "dead" storage (the volume below the level of the off
take). Throughout this text the terms storage and active storage are used
synonymously.
Many small reservoirs fill up and spill on the average several times
a year. These reservoirs are constructed to provide water over a short
drawdown period of only a month or two of low flows. The estimation of the
storage required in this case is termed a withinyear storage analysis.
Where the reservoir fills up and spills only every few years on the
average, the water stored at the end of one year is carried over to the
next. This is called carryover storage. On the other hand seasonal storage
results from the fluctuations of inflows and outflows during the year. In
procedures that utilize only annual data, the seasonal effects are not taken
into account. In this text such procedures are known as carryover pro
cedures; those concerned only with seasonal storage are known as within
year procedures. Figure 2.4 illustrates the difference between these two
components.
A finite storage is a conventional storage which can spill and run dry.
Not all reservoir storageyield procedures assume finite storages. A semi
infinite storage is one that can spill but never run dry. It is a
conceptual tool and the consequences of using it are discussed in Chapter 3.
Another conceptual storage is the infinite storage which can empty but
never spill.
15
FULL
....C
(JI
...
'0
...>4l
(JI
4l
a:
EMPTY
n n+6 n+12
Time (months)
2.4 RELEASE
Release
~ 100 ~ 100
"0 "0
c:
('iJ
c:
('iJ
E
Q)
E
Q)
Cl 0 Cl 0
0 C 0 C
Water stored Water stored
(al (b)
reservoir is empty to the total number of time units used in the analysis.
Hence,
P
e ~ (2.16)
R 1  P (2.17)
e e
actual supply
R (2.18)
v demand
This definition has merit for overall reservoir performance, but can mask
the severity of any restrictions imposed.
2.7 NOTATION
cs coefficient of skewness
R reliabilitv = 1  Pe
e ~
X. ' 1 th perlo
fl ow volumes d urlng . d
1
x mean flow
19
CHAPTER 3
Some of the methods of each group provide a reservoir size that will
not fail for the historical inflow sequence; the remaining methods allow
the user to determine the storage size for a given probability of failure.
However, all methods base the estimate of required storage capacity on
sequences of low flows and hence can be placed under the general heading of
critical period techniques.
I a critical I
~ period ~
FULL c
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EMPTY~+19404r1941~~1942r1943~1944+~19~45~~1~946~
Years
faiZure can occur during a critical period. Figure 3.1 gives an example
where there are two critical periods. Note that the remaining failures
(empty condition) of the reservoir in years 1945 and 1946 are not included
in a critical period.
15000
M
E
'"o
<II 10000
5:
o
;;::
.,
.>
(I)
3 5000
A
E
<.)"
I I I I I
(iii) Measure the largest intercept between the mass inflow curve
and the cumulative draft line.
21
Assumptions:
Limitations:
(iv) The method of analysis does not take into account net
evaporation losses. If required, an additional amount of
storage has to be added to the mass curve estimate to
cover this loss. Details of a procedure to do this are
given in Appendix A.
Attributes:
EXAMPLE 3.1
Using the mass curve method, find the storage required on the Mitta
Mitta River (Appendix E) to meet a draft of 75% of the mean flow.
* * * * *
Because the scale of the graph required to plot the entire 34 years
of data for the Mitta Mitta River is too large for this page size, only a
portion of the plot (the last 13 years) is shown in Fig. 3.2.
(i) Subtract the mean flow from each flow value of the record.
(If monthly data are used, subtract the monthly mean;
for annual data use the annual mean.) The resulting flows
are called residual values.
3000
'"E
~ 2000 Draft
~ 1000
:5
"'"'
III
1 mean flow
= 26.5 x 106 m 3
Imonth
E
_ 1000
III
:::
0
~ 2000
0::
3000
EXAMPLE 3.2
Using the residual mass curve method, determine the storage required
on the Mitta Mitta River (Appendix E) to meet a draft of 79.6 m3/month
(75% of the mean flow).
* * * * *
The mean monthly flow (106.1 x 10 6m3) is subtracted from the monthly
flows to determine the "residual" flows. The cumulative residual flows
(residual mass curve) are plotted in Fig. 3.3.
To determine the slope of the draft line, the mean flow rate is
subtracted from the draft rate. Thus the slope of the draft line is
(79.6  106.1) x 106m3/month. Lines of this slope are drawn tangent to the
humps on the curve and the maximum deficit determined. The answer is
1110 x 10 6m3 as shown in Fig. 3.3. Note that the scale of the residual
mass curve allows more accuracy than a mass curve drawn on the same scale.
24
(3.1)
subject to 0 ~ Zt+l ~ C
The usual time period is one month, but other periods can be used.
The net evaporation loss is the difference between the evaporation from the
proposed reservoir and the evapotranspiration from the proposed reservoir
site and depends on the surface area of water in the reservoir. Other
losses are comparatively small and are usually neglected.
(iii) Plot Zt+l against time on a monthly time scale (see Fig. 3.4).
~~
u
~
~
100
~ r ~

~
u 60
0
~
40
~
~
~
~
0
m20
0
1935
\ ~
1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965
LL
1969
Years
Assumptions:
Limitations:
(i) The reservoir is initially full. The significance of this
on storage size can be checked by examining a behaviour
diagram for various starting conditions. Analysis based on
generated data suggests that at least 100 years of streamflow
are required for some rivers before the effect of the
initially full assumption can be ignored (McMahon et aZ.,1972).
Attributes:
(iv) Not only can seasonal drafts be easily taken into account,
but also complicated operating policies can be modelled.
For example, there are real difficulties in including
release as a function of demand (itself a function of some
climatic variable) and the contents of the reservoir.
EXAMPLE 3.3
* * * * *
Mean flow 106.1 x 106m3/month (Appendix E).
Draft 79.6 x 106m3/month.
The mass curve method does not enable a probability of storage failure
to be calculated. Perhaps the earliest method proposed to calculate failure
probabilities was to run the streamflow sequence through a semiinfinite
storage (Hazen, 1914). (As defined in Sec. 2.3.4., a semiinfinite storage
can spill but never run dry.) Unfortunately, this method leads to error in
calculation of the probability of failure of a finite reservoir as shown
below.
II>
)(
<I:
2
c
;;::: .!!1
)(
c: <I:
E ~c:
II>
(/) u::
Full
.:: c
o 0
> '';:;
~ II>
11>
II> 0
Il> .,
0:0
p . (3.2)
seml
where i.
1
number of months of emptiness, and
N total in months of the record used in the analysis.
(3.3)
From Fig. 3.5, it is seen that Eii > Lm . Thus the assumption of
i
semiinfinite storage always results in the overestimation of the probability
of failure, and therefore the overestimation of the required behaviour
(finite) storage for a given probability of failure. Barnes (1954) argued
that this overestimation provided a safety factor which was necessary for
urban water supply design. For six locations on Australian rivers, storage
estimates for two conditions of draft and one probability of failure are
compared in Table 3.1 using finite and semiinfinite behaviour analysis.
The table shows that this overestimation is about 20%.
29
Rivers
(Australian gauging 50% draft 90% draft
station no.)
Yarra
14 26
(229102)
Murrumbidgee
14 12
(410008)
Lachlan
( 412010) 17 14
Warragamb.a
41 21
(212240)
Namoi
14 27
( 419007)
Burdekin
37 6
(120090)
 
Mean 23 18
EXAMPLE 3.4
* * * * *
The procedure is the same as a behaviour analysis but with an
arbitrarily high storage capacity. The behaviour diagram for the semi
infinite case is shown in Fig. 3.6. From the figure it can be seen that for
the period of record a storage of capacity 1110 x 10 6m3 or more will not
fail.
1000
E 800
"'o
., 600
.
a
Cl
400
ci5 This line gives 5%
proba bility of failure
200
o~~~ __~=~~__~~~~__~~
1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1969
Year
( a) (b)
(e) (d)
of the cumulative sums of departures from the mean streamflow will be equal
to the critical period storage estimate assuming the draft to be equal to
the mean annual streamflow. However, in Fig. 3.7(d) the range R Rl + R2,
but the required storage will be equal to the larger of Rl or R2 (This
characteristic will be examined further in our discussion of the sequent
peak procedure.) The range defined as R in Fig. 3.7 is the basis of a
number of important reservoir capacityyield procedures. These are now
discussed.
'/
CIA = 0.94  0.96 [G B}/s] 2 log1Q(C/RJ = 0.08 1.05 CxB}/s
1.0 1.0
0.8
0.8 0.6
a::
~ 0.6 
(J 0.4
(J
o o
o 00 00 o
0.4 8",8 o
0 0.2 o o
6' 0 80 o o o
o o
0.2 o
o '0 0
o
o o
o
0.2' 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.0
~xBJ/sJ'/2 (xBJ/s
Fathy and Shukry (1956) agreed with Hurst that for 100% regulation
the equivalent mass curve reservoir capacity was given by Hurst's range R.
But for lower drafts they disagreed entirely with Hurst and developed their
own method. However, as shown by Joy (1970) their technique is no more than
a mathematical representation of the minimum flow approach of Waitt' (1945)
given in Sec. 3.4.1.
Thomas (Thomas and Burden, 1963) proposed the sequent peak algorithm
as a method to circumvent the need to locate the correct starting storage
as is required in the mass curve procedure. In essence, the storage size
calculated using the sequent peak procedure is equal to the range of the net
cumulative inflow (inflow less draft) estimated for the historical record
concatenated with itself.
C (3.9)
0 PI First peak
1 56 23.6
23.6
2 32 47.6
71. 2
3 32 47.6
llS. S
4 38 41. 6
160.4
5 31 4S.6
209.0 Tl Lowest point between
6 113 33.4 peaks
175.6
7 lS9 109.4
66.2
8 529 449.4
383.2
9 217 137.4
520.6
10 152 72.4
593.0
11 SO 0.4
593.4
12 S4 4.4
597.S P 2 Second peak higher
13 53 26.6 than first
571. 2
14 27 52.6
5lS.6
35
The sequent peak algorithm was designed for use with replicates of
generated data rather than with a single historical record and so several
of the limitations attributed to it here are a consequence of using a single
historical record.
Unlike the mass curve procedure it can handle variable drafts so long
as they can be specified without reference to reservoir content (for example,
seasonal drafts). But like the mass curve, the required storage is a
function of record length and we are unable to determine capacities other
than those that satisfy the rank 1 low flow sequence.
EXAMPLE 3.5
* * * * *
The mean monthly flow for the Mitta Mitta is 101.1 x 10 6m3; therefore
75% draft is 79.6 x 106m3/month.
The first few months of the calculation are shown in Table 3.2. The
draft has been subtracted from each monthly flow and the residuals accumu
lated. The first summed residual value is itself a peak (designated Pi)'
because the succeeding values decrease. The next peak is shown as P2 .
The storage required to cover this flow sequence is Pi Tl where Tl is the
lowest cumulative residual value between the peaks, that is,
o (209,0) = 209 x 10 6m3 .
209, 957, 960, 242, 1032, 227, 287, 104, 204, 220, 194, 197, 157,
16, 414, 323, 283, 682, 1107, 957, 960, 242, 1032, 227, 287, 104,
204, 220, 194, 197, 157, 16, 414, 323, 283, 682 (x 10 6m3 ).
Drought curve
based on lowest
recorded flows
12 0 12 60
Time (months)
CDESIGN
(ii) Plot only the rank 1 flow volumes against the corresponding
durations on arithmetic graph paper.
EXAMPLE 3.6
Using the minimum flow procedure find the storage capacity required
to supply 75% draft (no failures) on the Mitta Mitta River (Appendix E).
* * * * *
A search of the flow records for the Mitta Mitta produces the
following:
5 26
10 238
20 618
30 1356
40 2077
50 3341
60 4275
70 4925
80 5730
90 6615
100 7704
These are plotted on Fig. 3.10 with the draft line (75% draft 'is
79.6 x 106m3/month). The largest intercept between the two curves is the
storage requi red. From Fig. 3.10 this occurs for a duration of 40 months
(= critical period); the storage can be measured from the graph or
calcylated thus:
Neither the mass curve nor the minimum flow approach nor the range
provides an estimate of the probability of storage failure. Alexander (1962)
extended these earlier approaches by developing a series of drought curves
for different probabilities of occurrence and from these derived generalized
storageregulationprobability curves.
39
8000
7000
;; 6000
E
<0
0 5000
~ 4000
0
;:
] 3000
0
I
2000
1000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Months duration
'"'"
<1l
III
>
III
>
.;:;
:J
<.>
III
'"c:
0 /
<.>
/
c: /
/
.E'" /
Historical flows
~ "",e .,,/
rank 1
<;)<~"'//////
0
;:
.S
''""
<1l
~ 0 2 4 5 6
Time (years)
Draft lines were also superimposed on the drought curves as Waitt had done
and storage capacity estimated as the difference between cumulative inflows
and outflows.
aI e x/S
f(x) = x (3.11)
Sa T (a)
X
Prob (x ~ X) I f(x) dx
o
a
1 IX x al e
xiS
dx (3.12)
S T(a).O
X
B= (3.14)
a
an na (3.15)
and as x nx
n
xn nx
Sn S (3.16 )
an na
"'"
">
:g
<.J
"
VI
C
0
<.J
C
~
~
0
~
VI
VI
::2'"
0 1 2 3 4
Time (consecutive years)
ii 2ii 3ii 4&
Shape parameter of Gamma distribution
0
I\.G~\)
1
JI
~O ~O ~~
",
1 :'1(
g0 ~'v 
\'~ I,<;, '12;..X, f". ,0 I vi.s> 0"
~",v ~KI"\Y/Kl><~o ~o (~
,... 80 '?JG:rK
~,1 1\ / K\V pj~Dr
.I~ k '~OOI
0'
,#_ " ...

Q
c~l"> :(\ \V\ /K ~t?v~#
;1 \ V\ ) /V)~0~v
c
o
i
:::J
en
Q)
a:
70
V
')..
,
V
/
I
I
/\ /
/ / /.1 V/
/ //~ / / ~~
r,
I J J j
..
Q)
en
cu
c
60
j
V J V/ Vj ~
VI 'i v,
/ V I V ~ v/VI
Q)
u
~
/ Il
cf 50
/ / 1/ ~
I I Regulation 0 with
capacity 1'1 giving I
J /
probability of failure'
V~ 1/(h
V V
40 II 1/T of r for =1 a.
~
V /I
Y
f/ /
30
) ~ ~ / ~ ~I
0.5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 g
Reservoir Capacity (1'1)
Assumptions:
Limitations:
(ii) Annual flows for some streams may not be Gamma distributed
although studies of annual flow data for Australian streams
suggests that this distribution is generally suitable
(McMahon, 1977). As the shape parameter increases, the Gamma
distribution approaches the normal distribution. Thus for
the more normally distributed Northern Hemisphere streams,
the Gamma distribution should be satisfactory.
(vi) The method of analysis does not take into account net
evaporation losses. If required, an additional amount
of storage has to be added to the computed value to cover
this loss (see Appendix A) .
Attributes:
EXAMPLE 3.7
Determine the storage required for 75% draft and 5% annual probability
of failure for the Mitta ~1itta River (Appendix E) using Alexander's
procedure.
* * * * *
From the data (Appendix E) and working in units of 10 6m3 ,
7.1496 (238.042)/34
0.1484
4A ~
1 + (1 + 3)
4A
3.53.
Tl 2.1, and
CP =~
3.53 = 3 . 4 years.
C D (3.22)
n,p n
C Dnx nx + z
n,p p
nx (Dl) + z (3.24)
p
To obtain the length of the critical period and the maximum required
storage differentiate Eq. 3.24 with respect to n and equate to zero giving
z 2
CP ~ C 2 (3.25)
4(lD)2 v
z 2
and hence
C E C 2
T (3.26)
x 4(lD) v
(i) that the critical period is large enough so that the nyear
flows will tend towards a Normal distribution;
EXAMPLE 3.8
Use Dincer's method and the annual flow data for the Mitta Mitta
River (Appendix E) to estimate the storage capacity required for a
controlled release of 75% with a probability of failure of 5%.
* * * * *
From Eq. 3.26,
c
x
3.5 years.
49
For a Normal distribution Dincer (Sec. 3.4.3, Eq. 3.26) showed that
z 2
c 1'.. c 2 X
4(lD) v
Lower p percentile z d
value p
z 2
P C 2 _ dC 2 (3.30)
.4(T=D) v v
Thus Eq. 3.30 is the same as Eq. 3.26 except for the correction
term dC 2.
v
EXAMPLE 3.9
Use Gould's Gamma procedure and the annual flows for the Mitta Mitta
River (Appendix E) to estimate the storage required on this river to meet
a draft of 75% with a probability of failure of 5%.
Equation 3.30
r4(6 z
*
2
* *
C
*
2
*
L ) v
920 (x 10 6m3).
~
o
;;::
Tim e (months)
~ Ranked
~ 4 monthly
~
sub  sequences
from total
~ sequence of
24 months
~
.
~
FIG. 3.16 Rank and subsequence concepts (for a 4monthly
subsequence, the lowest consecutive four months
of flow are ranked as no. 1).
53
p
m
probabi l i ty of occurrence (3.31)
N'+l
where m rank of the subsequence, and
N' length of record in months.
EXAMPLE 3.10
* * * * *
The procedure requires searches through the data file (Appendix E) to
find the lowest, second lowest etc. cumulative flows corresponding to a
number of durations.
The second lowest (that is, rank 2) sequence has a recurrence interval
of 409 204.5 months
2
17 years.
10 238 244
20 618 689
30 1356 1395
40 2077 2125
50 3341 3346
60 4275 4287
70 4925 4927
80 5730 5898
90 6615 6667
100 7704 7733
55
After interpolating between the two figures to get the flow corres
ponding to a 20 year recurrence interval for each duration, the results are
plotted in Fig. 3.17.
The greatest intercept between the draft line (79.6 x 106m3/mont~ and
the 1 in 20 year flow line is the required storage, 1070 x 10 6m3 , and corres
ponds to a critical period of 40 months. In practice, the storage estimate
needs to be increased by approximately 20% to account for bias due to cross
nesting of flows (Sec. 3.4.8).
7000
6000
ME 5000
'"o
';; 4000
Storage required
~ 3000 = 1070
u::
1 in 20
2000
1000
I ! I I ! I I
o 10 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Duration of sequence (months)
Based on the work of Hudson and Roberts (1955), Stall and Neill (1961)
presented another method for estimating the frequency distribution of the
flow series. From the (N'  n + 1) overlapping series of n months
duration, the lowest flow is selected and ranked as 1. However, unlike the
overlapping series approach, the next step is to neglect all other sequences
which overlap the rank 1 sequence. The rank 2 sequence is then selected
from the remaining flow record. Higher rankings are determined in a similar
manner with none of the flows for any particular rank overlapping the
sequence of flows for any other rank.
7000
;:; 6000
E
~ 5000
)(
; 4000
0
u:: 3000
Storage required
2000 = 980 (x 106 m 3 )
1000
0 10 70 80 90 100
Sequence duration in months
N + 1
T. (3.32)
l m
N + 1  2c
T. (3.35)
1 m c
T.
N + 0.4 (3.36)
1 m  0.3
From Eq. 3.31 the equivalent recurrence interval in years for a rank
m event by the overlapping procedure is given as follows:
NI + 1
T
o
:i.2Iil year s (3.37)
EXAMPLE 3.11
* * * * *
The procedure is to search through the data record to determine first
the lowest total flow for a given duration. Then, excluding those months
59
from the record and not allowing "straddling" of them by a sequence, the
remaining flow record is searched for the second lowest total flow for that
duration. This is repeated for several durations, as shown in the following
tab Ie.
10 238 244
20 618 837
30 1356 1480
40 2077 2367
50 3341 3763
60 4275 4301
70 4925 5386
80 5730 6030
90 6615 6827
100 7704 7798
From Eq. 3.32 the lowest flow for a given duration has a recurrence
interval of
34 + 1
1 35 years.
Annual low flow frequency curves are the basis of the United States
Geological Survey approach to withinyear storage requirements (see, for
example, Hardison and Martin, 1963). The steps in this procedure are as
follows:
60
(i) For duations 1, 7, 15, 30, 60, 120 and 183 consecutive
days, the mi.nimum flows for each year of the historical
record are determined.
1 N + 1
T (3.38)
r P m
sf
I II>
5~
"'. 1
4
"i:'
'<.>"
'f
.t:.
!I>
183 ~
:B'"
'5 >
I 120
"'" c
a;'" 2 SO
0
>
30 Cl
~
7
1.1 15 2 3 5 10 20 50
Recurrence interval (years)
(v) Flows for a given recurrence interval are read from the
low flow frequency curves and replotted as inflows against
duration (like the drought curves in earlier approaches)
on arithmetic graph paper (Fig. 3.20).
50
M
E 40 ./
./
'"0 ./
x Required reservoir ./
./
./
Q) 30 capacity ./
E ./
:l ./
"0
>
~ 20
0
;;::
.E
10
(vii) The largest intercept between the draft line and inflow curves
is taken as the reservoir capacity required to meet the draft
at the design level of reliability (or probability of failure).
For this situation the probability expresses the chance that
the reservoir, if operated under the design conditions, will
fail (empty) at least once within any year.
Asswrrptions:
(i) The reservoir is assumed to be initially full. Unlike
carryover storage situations this assumption will probably
be met in most situations, particularly as the levels of
regulation are usually very low.
(ii) Failures that occur after the end of the critical period
are neglected.
62
Limitations:
(v) The method of analysis does not take into account net
evaporation losses. If required, an additional amount
of storage has to be added to the computed value to
cover this loss (Appendix A).
Attributes:
EXAMPLE 3.12
Using the annual low flow frequency curves for Brandywine Creek at
Chadds Ford, Pa., Fig. 3.19, determine the storage required to provide a
30 96 draft with a 5% annual probabi Ii ty of fai lure. (l>lean flow rate for
Brandywine Creek = 1046 m3/s).
* * * * *
The 5% annual probability of failure corresponds to a recurrence
interval of 20 years. From Fig. 3.19 the flow rates for durations of 7, 30,
60, 120 and 183 days corresponding to a 20 year recurrence interval can be
read off as follows:
7 1. 62 0.97
30 1. 89 4.67
60 2.29 11.4
120 2.70 28.0
183 3.25 50.6
These points are plotted on the graph (Fig. 3.20) and the storage
determined from the maximum intercept between the demand and mass inflow
curves, that is, 5.1 x 10 6m3 . In practice, the storage estimate needs to
be increased by 10% to account for the bias due to crossnesting.
60
~
.2
Cii
::l
c:
c:
'"
c:
'"
Q)
E
'0
'EQ)
~
Q)
.3

....
0'"
~
.l)
10
'"~
.2
0
0 0.3 0.4 0.5
Median Annual 7day Low Flow.
(ratio to mean annual flow)
Consider the example given in Table 3.4 which is similar to that used
by Hardison to illustrate the bias. If the two years of low flow data are
timewise ordered the rank 1 and rank 2 deficiences (or storage sizes) are
3000 and 2500 m3/s day respectively. Yet if the flows are ordered by rank
(which is the procedure in low flow frequency analysis) the rank 1 and 2
deficiences are 3000 and 2000 m3/s day. The difference in rank 2 estimates
results from the crossnesting effects.
65
Deficiency in m3 js days
Flow in m3 js
for a draft of 600 m3 js
Ordering
5d~ 10 day 5d~ 10 day
period period period period
Hardison (unpublished paper, 1965) has examined this bias for the
independent series Md suggests that the underestimation of storage is
approximately 20% for streams with an Mnual coefficient of variation less
than 0.4. For withinyear analyses the degree of underestimation is
about 10%.
1.2
\
1.0 \
Q)
:t:
0
\
\
,
\
Cl c: \ ,
tV
.... ::l 0.8 carryover
!II
....
iii
::l
, \
c: 0.6
".:;....
Q) c:
tV
\
\
cr c:
tV
"\
"\ '.~ combined
Q)
a: Q)
~ 0.4
.....
"',
0.2
0 .0.1 95 98 99
Probability of failure ('Yo)
3.6 SUMMARY
From this review it is concluded at this stage that the Alexander and
Gould Gamma approaches appear to be suitable preliminary design procedures,
and that behaviour analysis of finite reservoirs is a useful technique to
display clearly the behaviour of the reservoir contents.
3.7 NOTATION
C reservoir capacity
CP critical period
C coefficient of variation
V
D. draft
1
K Hurs t exponen t
69
range of flows
range of flows
s standard deviation
x flow volume
70
x mean flow
x.l flow
z
a'
z standardized normal variate
p
Zt,Zt+l reservoir storage contents at the beginning and the
end of tth time interval
a shape parameter in Gamma distribution
CHAPTER 4
In Fig. 1.2 we see that the Moran approach can be subdivided into
three groups:
For x ( C  D
D D+x
g(x) = f(x)! g(x) dx + ! f(x+D t) get) dt (4.1)
o D
For x > C  D
D C
g(x) = f(x) ! g(x) dx + ! f(x + D  t) get) dt
o D
where x inflows,
C reservoir capacity,
D constant release during unit period,
f(x) inflow probability function, and
g(x) probability function of storage content
plus inflow during unit period.
(iii) those in which time and water volumes are both discrete
variables. This approach by Moran (given in his 1954
paper) and followed by others (for example Ghosal, 1962
and Prabhu, 1958b) is the basis of the practical applications
of his work. Basically it involved subdividing the reservoir
volume into a number of parts, thus creating a system of
equations which approximate the integral equations
(Eqs. 4.1 and 4.2). This approximation primarily affects
the results at the storage boundaries (that is, full and
empty) but is satisfactory if the subdivision of the
storage volume is fine enough.
Two main assumptions can be made about the inflows and outflows,
which occur at discrete time intervals. The first, given by Moran (1954),
assumes that the inflows and outflows do not occur at the same time. In
this model, termed the "mutually exclusive" model, the unit period is
73
Relative
Frequency
(Probability) 1/5
o 1 2 3
Units of flow
Z
t+l o if Z + Xt
t
~ M (4.3)
where
store d water at t h e b eglnnlng 0 f t h e t th perlo,
'd
Zt
Zt+l stored water at the end of the tth period or at
the beginning of the (t+l)th period,
K capacity of reservoir,
X . fl ow d
In '
urlng t th perlo,
. d an d
t
M constant volume released at the end of the unit
period.
74
Gi ven this information about capacity, draft and inflows, the firs t
step is to set up the "transition matrix" of the storage contents.
A transition matrix shows the probability of the storage finishing in any
particular state at the end of a time period for each possible initial
state at the beginning of that period. The transition matrix for the above
example is a (2 x 2) matrix representing an empty condition and a half full
condition as follows:
Initial State Zt
Empty Full
1 2
Finishing 1
1
Empty  + 2 
State 5 5 5 (4.6)
1 1 + 1 2
 + 1 + 1
Zt+l 5 5 5 5 5
Full 2
(always check)
I = 1 1
Note that the reservoir can never finish (and hence start) in the
full condition because of the mutually exclusive assumption about inflows
and outflows. Note also that the reservoir must finish in some condition
thus the sum of the probabilities in any column must be unity.
Let us now assume that the time unit is equal to one year and that
the reservoir of capacity 2 units is empty at the beginning of the year one,
that is, the initial probability distribution of storage contents is:
o
Storage
1 (4.7)
State
2
L=l
Since the transition matrix expresses the conditional probability of final
storage contents given the various values of initial contents, the proba
bility distribution of final contents can be found by the matrix product of
the transition matrix and the probability distribution of initial contents.
Therefore, at the end of year one (or at the beginning of the year two) the
probability of storage content will be:
The process can now be repeated, using the state vector as the new
starting condition. Therefore, at the end of the second year, the proba
bility of storage content will be:
At the end of the third year, the probability of storage content will be:
At the end of the fourth year, the probability of storage content will be:
0.33J (4.12)
[ 0.67
0.33J (4.13)
[ 0.67
o Zt + X
t
:: ~1 (4.14)
K :: Zt + Xt (4.16)
in which M is released at the end of the wet season. Let the probability
of the reservoir being in its empty zone at the end of a period be:
pI prob {Zt+l = o} (4.17)
o
prob {Zt + X :: M}. (4. 18)
t
In a similar manner equations can be derived for each of the KM+l zones
that the reservoir contents can occupy. The resulting set of KM+l equations
follow.
M Ml
pI
0 I q.
l L qi ... qo 0 0 0 P
0
i=O i=O
pI 0 0
1 qM+l qM ql qo PI
pI 0
2 = qM+2 qM+l q2 ql qo P2
I q.
i=Kl l
or in condensed form,
Consider the previous example but now with inflows and outflows
occurring simultaneously.
0, (4.22)
o M < K (4.23)
K M ;: K (4.24)
Initial State Zt
Empty Full
a I 2
I 2 I
Empty 0  + 0
Finishing 5 5 5
State
I 2 I
I (4.25)
Zt+l 5 5 5
1 I I 2 1 1
Full 2   +  +
5 5 5 5 5 + 5
I = I 1 1
the elements being determined in the same way as before. For example, to
start full and end full (with one unit of release) is possible for any
inflow except zero inflow. Hence the probability is the sum of the
probability of inflows of one, two, and three units of inflow, that is, O.S.
79
.6 .4.2
.2 OJ [1] [0.60J
[.2.2 .4.8 0.20, [0.40J 0.25 , ~0'18J
0.24 , [0.29J 0.25l
0.25 ,.. [0.13 (4.26)
0.20 0.36 0.46 0.56 0.62J
End of End of End of End of steady
1st yr. 2nd yr. 3rd yr. 5th yr. state
6 .2 0] [OJ [O'0.20,0.24,0.25,0.25,
OOJ [0.04] [0.07J [o.l1J .. [0.13] (4.27)
[.2.4.8 1 0.80 0.72 0.68 0.64 0.25
.2.4.2
0.62
End of End of End of End of steady
1st yr. 2nd yr. 3rd yr. 5th yr. state
(4.28)
where [T] transition matrix, and
m positive integer large enough for the
resulting matrix to be equivalent
to steady state conditions.
80
[6.2
.2
.2
.4
.4
O~'
.8
[:
.2
.2
.4
.4
0:]
.8
x
['
.2
.Z
.2
.4
.4
:] = [40
.8
.24
.36
.20
.28
.52
OO:J
.24
.72
.20 .16
[40
.24 .28 OJ' [22
.24 .25 .25 09J
.25
.36 .52 .72 .53 .59 .66
[22
.25
.16
.Z5
o~'
.25 [14 .25
.13
.25 012J
.25
.53 .59 .66 .61 .62 .63
[14
.25
.13
.25
012J
.25
[13
.25
.13
.25 13J
.25
.61 .62 .63 .62 .62 .62 (4.29)
[T 1 [P 1t = [P 1t + 1
(4.33)
Po 0.125
PI 0.250
P 0.625
2
These values are the same as those found by method (i)
(Eq. 4.27) and by method (ii) (Eq. 4.29).
Limi tations:
Attributes:
(i) The procedures sample all years of stream flow records without
reference to the historical sequencing (but serial correlation
is assumed zero).
In 1955 Moran modified the discrete model to deal with seasonal flows.
Transi tion matrices were prepared for each season and were multiplied
together to yield an annual transition matrix. However, as before, the
seasonal flows must be assumed to be independent. Lloyd and Odoom (1964)
adopted a somewhat similar approach.
In the approach storage capacity and draft are given, and probability
of failure of the reservoir is determined. If draft or storage size is to
be determined then a trial and error method needs to be utilised.
4.6.1 Procedure
Zt (Beginning of period)
0 1 2 3 4 19
0
1 l
2
Zt+l 3 Hal Hbl
(End of 4
period)
16
17 HcJ
18 f,
19
0, 1,2, 18, 19
t ~ ~V ~/
.....
t
(4.35)
85
19 19 19
18 18
17 17
A
1929 1929 1929
(a) (b) (c)
Zt  19
No. of months
of failure
Ri vers
(Australian gauging 50% draft 90% draft
station no. )
Yarra
29 17
(229102)
Murrumbidgee
32 16
(410008)
Lachlan
15 15
(412010)
Warragamba
41 7
(212240)
Namoi
21 23
( 419007)
Burdekin
20 26
(120090)
Mean 26 17
88
Po + PI + . + PK l =1 l4.36)
Probability of Conditional
prob abi 1 i ty of Product of
starting in a
failure in any probabili ties
Zone particular zone
month within
(steady state)
any year for
that zone
(1) (2) (3) (2) x (3)
L= 0.0200
(x) If the computed probability of failure does not e~ual the
design probability, choose a new capacity and proceed from
step (iv) again.
89
Assu;nptions:
Limitations:
AUributes:
~ 10 zones
25 20 zones
++ 30 zones
./0. 40 zones
20
~
~
"
~
15
'0
.~ 10
:c
"'0
.0
ct
5
O+~_r+~~~
o 2 3 4
Reservoir capacity (xl0 6 m3 )
(iv) At this state little guidance can be given regarding the effect
of beginning a Gould analysis in different months because insuf
ficient research information is available. It appears that, for
at least some rivers, the derived storage using a GOllld analysis
docs depend on the starting month if the draft is high. It is,
therefore recommendecl that before a fina 1 des i gn capaci ty is
chosen, four separate Gould analyses be carried out, each
heginning three months apart, to check the significance
of the starting month.
92
EXAMPLE 4.1
For the Mitta Mitta River (Appendix E) use Gould's probability matrix
procedure to determine the storage required to meet a draft of 75% of the
mean flow with a 5% probability of failure.
* * * * *
The Gould procedure requires a computer for efficient solution; for each
estimate of storage capacity the method requires each year of flow to be
routed through the storage for each possible starting condition. In
Sec. 4.6.2 it is shown that the number of zones required depends on the
coefficient of variation of annual flows, C ' For the Mitta Mitta River,
v
C is equal to 0.57; 15 zones should therefore suffice.
v
The procedure is an iterative one, the probability of failure being
calculated for the input draft and the storage capacity estimate. For the
Mitta Mitta at 75% draft and a storage capacity of 910 x 10 6 m3 the following
(15 x 15) transition matrix is obtained (terms are espressed as probability):
Starting Zone Zt
o 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
o .147 .147 .147 .147 .147 .118 .118 .088 .088 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.118 .118 .118 .118 .118 .088 .029 .059 .000 .088 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
.029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .088 .088 .000 .059 .000 .088 .000 .000 .000 .000
~ 3 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .059 .088 .000 .059 .000 .088 .000 .000 .000
+
N~ 4 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .000 .029 .059 .088 .000 .059 .000 .088 .000 .000
~ 5 .118 .118 .118 .088 .088 .059 .000 .029 .059 .088 .000 .059 .000 .088 .029
~ 6 .059 .059 .059 .088 .059 .059 .059 .000 .029 .059 .088 .000 .059 .000 .059
....~ 7 .029 .029 .029 .029 .059 .059 .059 .059 .000 .029 .059 .088 .000 .059 .029
....~ 8 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .088 .059 .059 .059 .000 .029 .059 .088 .000 .029
~ 9 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .088 .059 .059 .059 .000 .029 .059 .088 .029
10 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .029 .088 .059 .059 .059 .aoo .020 .059 .088
11 .029 .029 .029 .029 .029 .000 .000 .029 .088 .059 .059 .059 .000 .029 .029
12 .059 .059 .059 .059 .029 .029 .000 .000 .029 .088 .059 .059 .059 .000 .029
13 .147 .147 .147 .147 .176 .llS .147 .147 .147 .176 .265 .265 .294 .353 .353
14 .147 .147 .147 .147 .147 .235 .235 .235 .235 .235 .235 .294 .324 .324 .324
This estimate needs adjustment for the effects of the annual serial
correlation of 0.06. From Fig. B.l the adjustment factor is 1.06.
T C/x aC b (4.37)
v
Probabili ty of failure (% )
Draft
Parameter
(%) 2.5 5 10
a 2.51 1. 81 1. 21
b 1. 83 1. 79 1. 74
70
e +21, 17 +25, 20 +29, 23
r2 96 94 92
EXAMPLE 4.2
* * * * *
From Eq. 4.37
b 
storage, C (aC ) x
v
C 0.57
v
Table 4.3 gives values of a and b for various drafts and prob
ability of failure. Since a draft of 75% is not mentioned specifically, it
is necessary to interpolate on a loglinear plot of draft versus storage
as follows:
Draft ae b C
a b (l06 m3)
(%) v
90 5.07 1. 81 1. 83 2331
70 1. 81 1. 79 0.66 841
50 0.75 1. 93 0.25 319
30 0.22 1. 49 0.10 127
Adjust for annual serial correlation. From Fig. B.l for 75% draft
and annual serial correlation of 0.06 correction factor is 1.06 approxi
mately. Thus the estimate of storage requirement by McMahon's procedure is:
1090 x 1.06
X
2000
1000
M X
800
E
~
0 600
~
500
400
~
CD
~ X
~ 300
0
~
00
200
X
100
0
Procedure:
(i) Compute the mean, standard deviation and coefficient of
skewness of both the annual flows and their common
logari thms.
3
.....>.
'v<'G
Co 2
<'G
()
\..
0
...
>
Q)
1/1
Q)
0:
Variability index Variability index
C
('II
Q)
E
o
o
2  PERCENT CHANCE 1  PERCENT CHANCE
o
~
Q)
(/)
Q)
a: 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Coefficient of variation Coefficient of variation
~ 3
:l
C
c 2
1'0
C
1'0
/I)
E
....0 0
0 2  PERCENT CHANCE 1  PERCENT' CHANCE
:p
...
1'0
4
OF DEFICIENCY OF DEFICIENCY
11/
1'0
<tJ
> 3
u
1'0
Co 2
1'0
(.)
0
...
...>
/I)
11/
00 0 0.20.4
/I)
a: Coefficient of variation Coefficient of variation
EXAMPLE 4.3
* * * * *
As described in Sec. 4.7.3, it is necessary to compute the mean,
standard deviation, and skewness of both the annual flows and the common
logarithms of annual flows. Parameters for the flows are given in
Appendix E. These calculated annual parameters are:
101
Stmdard
~m Skew
Deviation
4.S.l Melentijevich
4.8.2 Klemes
4.8.3 Phatarfod
Steps in his method, which assumes the draft is the unit of measure
ment, are:
(ii) Calculate
4
h 2
(4.38)
Y
a Q::L (4.39)
2
20
e ).l  (4.40)
y
where l/t = v.
For example, if t = 1/3,
Y = H 1 + [1 + 4(1~P)l\ (4.42)
e (1 e) =
+r) + ea(lr) + [{il+r)+ eaClr)}24rl~J ( 4 . 4 3)
h loge [Cl"~~"'~~''~'""~
C = v log y Dx (4.44)
e
where C capacity in volume units, and
x mean annual flow in volume units/year.
This model assumes that annual flows are Gamma distributed and is
based on a fixed draft. It is considered to be a preliminary design
procedure, although the solution of Eqs. 4.41 and 4.43 can be quite time
consuming. The procedure is a useful preliminary way to determine the
likelihood of the reservoir falling below some level and the possibility of
restrictions in releases. Because of the approximation made, the procedure
is limited to v being less than or equal to about 5. (Phatarfod, personal
communication, 1977.)
EXAMPLE 4.4
* * * * *
For the Mitta Mitta River (Appendix E) annual flow parameters are:
Draft D 0.75
(0.76) (1.50)
From Eq. 4.39, a = 2
0.57
2a
From Eq. 4.40, e lJ Y
1.33 _ 2 (0. 76)
r:so
0.32.
3.89.
[Note that this is the reservoir size for which there is a probability of 5%
of being only one third (or less) full. Thus the figure of 2130 x 10 6m3 is
105
4.9 SUMMARY
4.10 NOTATION
CHAPTER 5
(5.1)
Time Time
FIG. 5.1 Timeseries components of the
streamflow process.
x't (5.2)
109
From 1936 to the 1960's, Hurst studied the river Nile, and developed
various card sampling techniques to generate annual flows which were used
in simulated operational studies of the Aswan High Dam. Details can be
found in Hurst's text (1965), pp. 4142.
(5.4)
This equation was adopted in order that the expected vaZues of the mean,
standard deviation and serial correlation of the computed xi+l's would be
equal to the respective values of those parameters derived from the
historical record and used in the righthand side of the equation.
Moreover, if the xi values are normally distributed, then it follows
that the xi+l values will also be normally distributed. (Appendix C
shows theoretically that this algorithm does preserve the mean, standard
deviation and serial correlation of the flows.)
112
(v) This and some other models can generate negative flows.
When this occurs the negative value is to calculate the
next flO\oJ, after which it is set to zero. Such a procedure
is acceptable so long as the proportion of negative flows
is not too high (say no more than 5%). In addition, one
should check the difference in mean flow of the generated
sequence with the negative values included and with them
set to zero. If the difference is greater than say one
percent, the model is probably unsatisfactory for that stream.
i
x.
1
X.
1
x r l (xi x) x+rl (xi x) t.
1
\ s (lrir xi + 1
deterministic random
component component
In the annual Markov model as outlined above, only two of the four
components assumed to make up the streamflow process, as defined in Eq. 5.1,
are accounted for explicitly. Trend and periodicity are not considered.
The algorithm for the Thomas and Fiering seasonal model is as follows:
b. (5.6)
]
X
2
xFEB + bFEB/JAN(x l  xJAN ) + tl sFEB (1  r2FEB/JAN)~ (S.7a)
x3 x
MAR
+ bMAR/FEB(x2 xFEB ) + t2 sMAR (1  r2MAR/FEB)~ (5.7b)
x
13
= xJAN + bJAN/OEC(X12XOEC) + t s
12 JAN
(l  r2JAN/DEC)~ (S.7c)
5.5.1 Modifying tj
In dealing with the problem of skewed data, Thomas and Burden (1963)
transformed the Normal variate, t., to a skewed variate, t , with an
l Y
approximate Gamma distribution (designated as 'like Gamma' in the following
text), using the Wilson and Hilferty (1931) transformation thus:
Y t y2.~ 3
t 2 1 + t,~ i t,J (5.8)
Y [  36
Y t,j
ti N (0,1)
t like G(O,l'Y t .), and
Y ,J
repetitive annual cycles of seasons usually 1 ~ j ~ 12.
116
(5.9)
0.6 ////
Wilson and Hilferty/
transformation /
unacceptable
0.4
0.2
0+rr.,1~~~
2 C 3
s
0.2
(5.10)
EXAMPLE 5.1
Over the period of record the January flows for the Mitta Mitta
River (Appendix E) exhibit a skewness of 1.8; for February, it is 1.1.
The serial correlation coefficient of monthly flows between January and
February is 0.58. Show how a random number from a Normal distribution
[N CO, 111 can be transformed to a like Gamma skewed variable [G(O,l,1 .)].
t, J
* * * * *
A random number taken from the Normal distribution [N(O,l)J is
 0.4305.
 r~ I.
From Eq. 5.9: J ]
1.1  (0.58)3(1.8)
(1  0.58 2 )3/2
= 1. 385
1. ~05 [
1 +
(1. 385) ( 0.4305)
6
_ (1.385)2] 3
36
2
1.385
= 0.5655
Generating Algorithm:
(5.13)
where t. N(O,l),
l
Parameter Estimation:
x.
J
Aj + exp (0.5 sj + Xj ) (5.14)
where
Historical Logtransformed
data value
mean x.
J
standard deviation S.
J
coefficient of skewness gj
lag one serial correlation r.
J
and B. R. Sj+lJ
S (5.18)
J J [ j
To solve for A., X., S., R. begin with Eq. 5.16 and solve for S ..
J J J J J
This is not explicit in S.and an iterative solution is required. One fast
J
converging technique is the NewtonRaphson method providing a reasonable
initial guess is used. The procedure is given in Appendix D. Once S. has
J
been determined, then use Eqs. 5.14, 5.15 and 5.17 to obtain xJ., A. and R..
J J
119
EXAMPLE 5.2
This cannot be solved explicitly for Sj; a trial and error procedure is
required. If a reasonable first trial value is obtainable, the Newton
Raphson procedure (Appendix 0) gives rapid convergence to the solution.
0.0075.
0.6513.
 0.0075
Therefore, second estimate 0.25  0.6513
0.2615.
3.748.
8.469.
Rl cannot be obtained from Eq. 5.17 until S2 is found from Eq. 5.16
(S2 0.3419) .
0.6054.
Similarly the computations can be done for the other 11 months; the
results are given in Table 5.2.
LogTransformed Parameters
Month
Mean Standard A. Serial
]
Deviation Correlation
(5.19)
and the model parameters for input into Eq. 5.12 can be determined
explicitly from Eqs. 5.14, 5.15 and 5.17. The model modified in this way
is based on a two parameter lognormal distribution rather than the three
parameter one.
For annual data generation, Eqs. 5.12 to 5.17, which are set down
above with monthly subscripts, are modified appropriately.
= 3C v + C
v
3 (5.20)
This procedure was proposed by Beard and has been adopted by the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (Beard,1972). The following equations
are for annual flows:
v L=.Z (5.21)
s
y
(5.23)
EXAMPLE 5.3
Apply the normalizing flow procedure to the annual flows for the
Mi tta Mi tta River (Appendix E) to demonstrate this method of flow
generation.
* * * * *
123
Following the steps listed in Sec. 5.5.3 and referring to Table 5.3:
(i) Add 0.01 (that is, s = 0.01) to all of the annual flows
in column (2) of the table, and enter the natural logarithm
of each in column (3).
1.0752;
Note: The very low serial correlation means that the vi+1 t ..
l
V
z = {[ 0.~825 (v
2
  0.~825) + 1r  1} _ 0.~825
 1.1053.
x exp (y + v
2
s)
y
exp (7.00121  1.1053 x 0.5592)
591.76
124
(vi) Hence the first generated flow in the sequence is 591.76  0.01
= 591.75 ~ 592. Subsequent flows are calculated in the same
way.
i year, and
month.
125
Results presented in the Harms and Campbell paper suggest that the
model works well. In cases where the annual flows are not normally dis
tributed, a skewed distribution could be used in place of the normality
assumption. One minor drawback with this approach is that the method of
adjusting monthly data does not allow the monthly serial correlation
coefficient from the end of one year to the beginning of the next to be
preserved.
Statistic Model J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
Historical 5.4 3.8 3.7 4.2 6.5 8.8 12.1 14.9 14.3 13.0 10.6 8.3
LGLT 5.4 3.8 3.7 4.2 6.7 8.8 12.1 14.9 14.3 13.0 10.5 8.1
Mean
(Mm3) LN2 5.4 3.9 3.8 4.2 6.4 8.5 12 .5 15.3 14.7 13.1 10.6 8.0
LN3 5.7 4.4 3.8 4.2 6.4 8.5 13.3 16.9 14.3 13.3 10.7 7.5
Historical 2.0 1.1 1.2 1.9 3.7 5.1 5.2 5.7 5.2 4.9 4.7 4.8
Standard LGLT 2.0 1.0 1.2 1.9 4.3 5.3 5.6 6.0 5.3 4.8 4.6 4.2
Deviation
CMm3) LN2 2.3 1.5 1.4 1.7 3.3 4.6 6.3 6.8 6.2 5.1 4.3 3.9
LN3 2.7 3.3 1.7 1.6 3.6 4.6 5.3 13.4 5.3 6.0 4.6 2.7
Historical 1.2 0.5 0.8 1.6 1.7 2.0 0.9 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.9 3.4
Skew
LGLT 1.3 0.5 0.8 1.4 2.4 1.9 1.3 1.0 1.1 0.5 l.0 1.9
LN2 l.2 l.0 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.2 l.2 0.9 1.0 1.3
LN3 1.3 1.2 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.8 l.4
Historical 0.86 0.64 0.56 0.44 0.64 0.82 0.68 0.73 0.61 0.76 0.66 0.70
LGLT 0.86 0.69 0.59 0.39 0.77 0.87 0.67 0.72 0.77 0.77 0.73 0.90
Serial
LN2 (j.92 0.68 0.51 0.33 0.62 0.87 0.79 0.80 0.66 0.75 0.50 0.80
Correlation
LN3 0.98 0.81 0.42 0.40 0.61 0.94 0.94 0.73 0.75 0.74 0.33 0.85
O'Shannassy
a a a
229103 0.29 94 97 l57
(SO)
Gordon
0.23 90 74 92
308007
( 7) (7) (10)
(36 )
Yarra
0.44 86 85 116
229103 (10) (8) (12)
(50)
Torrens
0.77 94 59 89
504501
(19) (13) (13)
(72)
Warragamba
1. 07 107 53 60
212240
(24 ) (20) (12)
(72)
earlier  two and three parameter lognormal (denoted by LN2 and LN3) and
the like Gamma distribution (LGLT). In using the latter distribution a
logarithmic transformation was initially applied to the data. These tables
highlight a number of points:
(i) In Tables 5.4 and 5.5, except for LGLT for Warragamba and the
LN3 August standard deviation, the annual and monthly means
and standard deviations compare well with the historical
estimates.
From this analysis, it can be seen that using the historical values
as a basis of comparison, the LGLT model shows least variations yet exhibi ts
some unsatisfactory parameter estimates. On the other hand, the LN2 and
LN3 models reproduce the parameter values, but deviate markedly from the
historical storage estimates. Thus no model is wholly satisfactory.
Tables 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9 deal with a more detailed evaluation of
Markov models than that discussed above, although the evaluation was
restricted to the annual lag one type (R. Srikanthan, personal communication,
1977). In all, 16 rivers * which represent the range of streamflow varia
bility. encountered across the Australian continent were examined. Up to
seven variations of model distributions were considered and for each case
5000 years of data were generated. In addition to the parameters and
characteristics listed at the beginning of this section results were
examined for the range, Hurst's H and K exponents, run lengths, extreme
events, spectral values and distribution types.
* In Table 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9, the names and national stream gauging numbers
refer to the following Australian rivers as follows: (1) King (309001),
(2) Wilmot (315003), (3) South Johnstone (112101), (4) Yarra (229103),
(5) Murray (401201), (6) South Esk (318001), (7) Wungong (615071),
(8) Serpentine (615074), (9) Loddon (407203), (10) Torrens (504501),
(11) Ord, (809302), (12) Peel (419004), (13) Warragamba (212240),
(14) Burnett (136001), (15) Wide Bay Creek (138002) and (16) Goulburn
(21006) .
131
Hist. 2230 1620 1710 540 )60 238 214 122 61 144 94 209 120 44 126 27
::nm)
2350 1610 1720
530 61 205 121 43 124 26
2320 1620 1710 540 370 236 210 119 61 132 96 210 123 44 127 26
119 43 124 26
LN2 540 )70 239 216 123 61 145 96 209 123 45 127 27
LN3 540
540
)70
370
239
240
217
216
123
122
62
63
145
146
97
97
213
214
124
124
46
46
132
131
028
Hist. 0.18 0.22 0.38 0.40 0.47 0.47 0.50 0.57 0.78 0.78 0.80 0.82 1.11 1.14 1.26 1.79
Hist. 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 1.3 0.9 0.6 1.0 0.9 1.5 1.2 1.1 2.8 2.4 2.5 3.6
C":\r,:...0
0.2 0.4 0.2
0.7
0.7 1.2 0.9 0.6 0.8
0.9
0.9 1.4 1.2 ::: ~~~:: ~
2.32.0 2.6 ~
LN2
LN3
9 0.7
1.]
1.2
GC08C0GG@
A
0.8 @ 0.9 0.9 1.3 1.1 1.1
2.7 2.6
1.9
@)~
2.5 1.9
0.8 1.] 1.2 ~ee 1.5 @8 2.9 2.9 2.8 'd
Hist. 0.09 0.06 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.02 0.07 0.24 0.30 0.20 0.28 0.18
0.11
0,10 8 0 , 2 1
0,19
0,16
0.13
0.01
wh~r~
LN3
__ 
W  Weibull
0,00 0.20 0,19 0.13 0.01 0.06 0.22 0.29 0.19
K .. Kirby's transformation LN2 ,. T.... o parameter log normal LN3 = Three parameter log nonnal
B .. 8eard's method
1.)Z
N        
%
W @])   Ci]) CQ)~@
e g C8) 0.9 6.5 ~
~
negative G 1.6
flows
K     o ~ 16. 3l.
8 LN2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LN3 g 3.3
80 QJ) cQ)@ @
B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N        
9 g
~~
W 0.9   0.6
%
increase
G C[D 0.1 0.7
CO> 0.1 0.4 1.6 5.8
in x K     0 0.6 Z.O 3.8
0 LNZ
LN3
0
C[D
0
0.4
0
0.8
0
cQ)
0
0.9
0 0
cQ) CQ) ~
0
B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hist. 0.00 0.00 0,23 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.50 0,50 1.1 0.67 l.2 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.1 2.4
0, 01 88      
1.~ 8~
~
0.18 3.1
5" 8 0.01 0. 23 8.21 GO.57 o l.~ ~:~ ~: 85
1.4 8 .. 5.1
4.5
G LN2
LN3
0.14 8~ @ 0.56@8
9880.58
0.21 0.20
e@ 0.69 1.3 1.00 1.1 1.4
1.7 1.4
e
2.6
0.20 0.22 0.24 0.50 0,58 1.2 0.86 1.0 l.0 1.6 1.6 2.1
Hist. 0.43 0.48 0.94 1.8 2.2 1.7 2.2 3.3 5.2 3.5 5.9 5.9 13.7 8.8 11.1 13.9
(!.43~
6.2
8 14 . 2 10.2 10.1 IS.1
5" 0 : 9 0 . ; 7 8 8 5 2.5
eG@ 6.3
8 4.9 6.2 12.8
13.78
10.7 12.7
8
G
12,0 17.1
LN2 2.0 2.5 4.7 6.8 12.2 10.0 11.6 15,1
His!. 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.10 0.94 0.77 0.63 0,58 0.23 0.33 0.32 0.28 0.21 0.23 0.11 0.30
8 8 8 '~0.02
0.88 0.02
"'
1.4 J.4 0.9
8 O,8S D,79 0.56 0.08
.
0.26
.
0.01 0.11
0.10
G LNZ
LN'
0.97
0.84
0,86
0.82
0. 90
0.75
8
0.54
0 . 72
0.46 ~~(B@5
0.11 0.23 0,19 0.11
0.27
0.03
0.88 0.86 0.86 0.60 0.54 0.23 0.36 0.36 0.32 0.26
Hist. '.9 9.2 8.9 7.9 7.2 7.7 7.7 6.3 '.6 6.0 5.4 4.8 4.0 4.' '.7 2.9
G LN2
LN,
7.7
7.6
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.5
7.1
@
6.8
6.5
7.7 7.' 7.6 7.1 0.8
5.9 SIMULATION
80
70
~ 60
.:::<II
5 50
40
30
20
10~''rLrrr~r~~~~
o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Storage (106m 3)
FIG. 5.3 Relationship of draft and probability of
failure to reservoir capacity for the
Mitta Mitta River.
137
This single estimate of the storage required (that is, 760 x 10 6m3)
is based on the historical record which itself is only a sample of the total
flow record for the river. It is probable that other flow sequences, with
the same mean, standard deviation, and serial correlations, and equally
likely to occur could result in different storage estimates.
Table 5.10 shows the storage estimated from flow sequences generated
using a three parameter lognormal distribution. The historical parameters
were converted to the equivalent lognormal parameters using moment trans
formation equations (Sec. 5.5.2) and each sequence generated was of the
same length as the historical to avoid the effect of storage estimate
increasing with record length (Sec. 3.2.1). To estimate the storage a
fixed release (75%) of the historical mean flow was used.
It will be noted from the table that the mean flows of the generated
sequences vary, but the overall average (1282) is consistent with the
historical mean flow (1274). The storage estimates vary widely, however,
being quite sensitive to the mean flow (and other parameters) of the
corresponding sequence.
1300
1200
x
x
1100 x
1000
;; 900 x
E
<0
0 600 x
Gl
700
'"~ 600
0
x
iii
500
400 x
300
200
099 0.95 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.15 O. I 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.02
Risk that storage estimate is too small
Probability of
Mean annual Storage estimate being
Sequence flow estimate too low
From such a graph the risk of the storage estimate being too low is clearly
shown. For example, using historical data a storage of 760 x 10 6m3 is
required, but there is a 20% chance that a storage greater than 930 x 10 6m3
is necessary to meet the design requirements, that is 75% draft,
5% probability of failure.
Thus the use of generated data gives the designer a clearer picture
of the variability of his estimate and allows him to choose a value
dependent on the risk acceptable to him.
Gould (1964), Guglij (c. 1959) * and Svanidze (1964) provide curves
relating carryover storage to draft, flow variability, flow distribution
shape, persistence and probability of failure. To establish these
relationships, the authors stochastically generated annual flow data and
analysed these for storage need.
reservoir capacity
standard deviation' (5.28)
Lines for three probability of failure values are also shown on the
figures. Gould also provides a correction factor (Eq. 5.29 below) for
assuming annual serial correlation is zero. This equation was based on
analysis of additional synthesized data.
Procedure:
The procedure for estimating the required carryover storage for given
values of constant draft and probability is as follows:
O+~~'.rr
5
2~~
10.,~r__,
O+~~.__r_,~
2 3 4 5
k1 +O.15
2
4~
10~~~
2
41______________________________________ ~
Comments:
EXA~lPLE 5.4
!vIe an 1274 (x 10 6 m3 )
Standard Deviation 731 (x 10 6 m3 )
Coeff. of Skewness 1.5
Serial correlation 0.06
731 x 10 6 x 1.65
144
Guglij and Svanidze used Monte Carlo models and a modification of the
Pearson Type III distribution known as the KritskiiMenkel curve
(Kartvelishvili, 1969, p. 35) to generate long sequences of annual flows
(1000 years or more) for various combinations of coefficients of variation,
skewness and serial correlation. These data sequences were used to deter
mine finite storage capacities (as ratios of mean annual flow) for given
values of draft and reliability. Guglij results are summarized in 66 graphs
(provided by S. Selvalingam, personal communication, 1976). Svanidze
includes more details in his 120 graphs (Kartvelishvili, 1969, Appendix VII).
But both sets of results are of use only for streams with low variability 
less than 0.4 or 0.8 for Svanidze's curves and 1.4 for Guglij's relations.
Moreover, their usefulness for high drafts is limited because the computed
storage sizes are limited to values less than 2.8. These relationships
include annual serial correlation as a parameter which is not available in
Gould's Synthetic Data curves.
5.11 NOTATION
CHAPTER 6
Over the past several years, the authors have been involved in four
comparative studies using Australian streams in which reservoir capacity
yield techniques have been assessed. Results of three of the studies have
been published (Joy, 1970; Joy and McMahon, 1972; ~jcMahon and Codner, 1973;
Codner and McMahon, 1973; McMahon, Codner and Joy, 1973); the fourth will
be published shortly (C.H. Teoh, personal communication, 1977).
In Figs. 6.1 and 6.2 storage estimates at 50% and 90% drafts
respectively for the six rivers are compared among the critical period
techniques  minimum flow (Waitt), Alexander's method corrected for the
assumption of zero serial correlation, overlapping series mass curve
frequency method (Thompson), independent series mass curve frequency method
(Stall) and behaviour estimates for 5% probability of failure. (Note that
to obtain a suitable scale, storages have been standardised by dividing by
the standard deviation of monthly flows. Reference numbers refer to the
rivers listed in Table 6.1.)
From Figs. 6.1 and 6.2 it is seen that the Waitt technique (excluding
the additional one year's supply) which is equivalent to a mass curve
TABLE 6.1 Rivers investigated in evaluation of critical period and probability matrix methods.
Annual Monthly
No. River Area Period of
(Australian Streamgauging (sq. km) Record Mean Coeff. Coeff. Serial Coeff. Coeff. Serial
Station Reference Number) (mm) of of Corre1. of of Corre1.
Var. Skew Var. Skew
1 Yarra 334 18921968 540 0.40 0.77 0.12 l.00 1.77 0.62*
(229103)
4 Warragamba 8750 18811959 122 1.11 2.67 0.30* 2.14 4.71 0.45*
(212240)
0
10
(4)
Ii
(3)
0 Waitt
6 Thompson
8 Stall
Alexander
(5)
0
6
SI
(f (6)
"
0 I
4
(2)
0
(1)
0
,,/ "
2 "
"
O~.r'~
o 2 4 6
Sbl (f
80 o
(4)
o Waitt
6. Thompson
Stall
60
Alexander
(3)
(2)
40 0
(5)
e
(1) (6)
0 0
20
o 20 40 60
These views are confirmed in practice by Fig. 6.1 which shows that
the Thompson procedure underestimates the behaviour storage for rivers 1,
2, 5 and 6 and overestimates it for rivers 3 and 4. From Table 6.2 it is
seen that rivers 1, 2, 5 and 6 have short critical periods whereas rivers
3 and 4 have long ones.
River*
Method
1 2 3 4 5 6
50?, Draft
Mass curve and Waitt 1.5 2.0 10 8.3 5.0 6.7
~linimum flow with
0.5 2.2 3.1 3.2 3.0 2.7
probabi li ty (Alexander)
Overlapping series
1.5 1.5 8.3 5.0 2.0 1.5
(Thompson)
Independent series
0.8 2.0 3.0 3.0 0.5 1.5
(Stall)
90% Draft
Mass curve and Waitt 7.5 20 18 15 15 15
Minimum flow with
10 + greater than 50 >
probability (Alexander)
Ove r 1 app ing series
+ greater than 12 >
(Thompson)
Independent series
(Stall)
1.5 5.0 I 6.7
I 8.3 I 6.7 I 8.3
In both Figs. 6.3 and 6.4 the original Gould method overestimates the
behaviour storage. On the other hand, the modified Gould method fits the
behaviour relationship satisfactorily.
6 Gould
Modified Gould
(4)
6.
6
(6) (5)
6.
6.
4
(2)
6.
(ll
./
6.
O~..'r~
o 2 4
Sb/
6 8
(f
(4)
to.
(3)
to.
60 (5) (2)
to.
to.
40
(6)
to.
s/ ()
20 (ll
6 6. Gould
Modified Gould
O~'~r~~
o 20 40 60
2.5 /
,!,V/
1.0
'i
0.5
"cc'"
'"c
.,'" 0.25
E X
.,
0>
::::
0
0.1
.&til
E
:;:;
~ 0.05
:;
o
.;; aBehaviour Method: Initially empty
til
6Behaviour Method: Initially full
~ 0.025
III
0.01
/
/
/
o;y
/
0.005~/~__~~______~~~__~~____~~______~~____~~____L________~
0.005 0.01 0.025 0.05 0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0 2.5
Gould Estimate (Storage/mean annual flowl
6.1.7 Summary
From these two studies we conclude that the modified Gould technique
is a suitable analytical storageyield procedure for final design. In
addition, it is noted that the behaviour analysis, which was used as a basis
for comparison, gave results consistent with theoretically acceptable
procedures so long as the effect of initial conditions is recognized.
155
25 I I I I I I /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
! /
lOt
/
/
/
! 
5.0 t
~! ~~{~<!~ !
!

2.5 
B fA!:& 1, 
d~
!
1.0 r 
g1 !
~lr
0.5 t 
/
~
0.25 t / 
/ 0 Behaviour Method: Initially em pty
:or 6 Behaviour Method: Initially full
/
/
O.l~____~~I__~~I~__~IL____~~l ____~I~____LI______~
0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0 2.5 5.0 10 25
Gould Estimate {Storage/mean annual flowl
FIG. 6.6 Comparison of behaviour results (initially full and empty)
with modified Gould estimates for 156 Australian streams
at 90% draft and 5% probability of failure.
0.8
/
/ ", \
/ \ M
I
... ...
/
/ \
\ E 3 I ... ...
/
/
\
\ '"0 I
I ... ...
\ .... ....
M
\ "",,,,,,,"" .... .... X 80% band'\.
I
E .... .... I
I
'"0 ....
X
0.6
Q)
01 I
'"
.8
'
2
<Il
01
'"
'
0
I
(j)
, ....
"
, " / .....
ci) 0.4 I , / .... ...
,,  "" /
" . .
,,
/
0.2 ,"
, /
. I
Historical Behaviour
Historical Gould
 I
Historical Behaviour
 iHistorical Gould
x Generated Behaviour
X Generated Behaviour
0 Generated Gould
0 Generated Gould
o 0
50 100 200 500 20 50 100 200
Generated Period (years) Generated Period (years)
FIG. 6.7 Behaviour and modified Gould storage estimates FIG. 6.8 Behaviour and modified Gould storage esti
based on historical and generated data for mates based on historical and generated
conditions of 50% draft and 1% probability of data for conditions of 90% draft and 1%
failure [Namoi River at Keepit No. 2 probability of failure [Namoi River at
(419007) New South Wales]. Keepit No.2 (419007) New South Wales].
TABLE 6.3 Reservoir capacltles estimated by behaviour and *
Gould techniques using historical and generated data.
Warragamba 11 4 8 9 5 7
(+110%, 30%) (+93% , 34%) (n. a.) (n. a. , 22%)
* Storage estimates are expressed as ratios of mean annual flow. Synthetic estimates are the median
values of ten replicates. Values in brackets represent the variation of storage sizes within which
eight of the ten replicates lie.
obtained using generated data of length 20500 years. Results for one
river are shown in Figs. 6.7 and 6.8 and for all three rivers in Table 6.3.
A Thomas and Fiering monthly model using the like Gamma distribution and an
initial logarithmic transformation (LGLT) was adopted as the data generation
procedure. Assuming that the monthly generated flows are representative of
alternative historical sequences, a number of observations follow:
The results shown in Table 5.9 are also pertinent to this evaluation.
There it was found that the storage estimates based on annual generated data
using Beard's technique overestimated the historical values by about 10%.
This result is not inconsistent with the results in Table 6.3 where the
estimates based on replicates of 200 years of generated data are within
10% of the historical Gould value.
20
,0
"
"Qj I
""C
c:
'"
~
<'"
30% draft. 95% reliability
50% draft. 90% reliability
70% draft, 98% reliability
90% <:iraft. 95% reliability
05
05
2 5 1 2 5 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
(reservoir capacity / mean annual flow)
20 ++
'0 .*
'"
0; 2
.,E
'""
"
~E 5
c:
o x 30% draft. 95% reliability
o 50% draft. 90% reliability
c, 70% draft, 98% reliability
+ 90% draft. 95% reliability
05
05 2 5 1 2 5 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
( reservoir capacity I mean annual flow)
20
+
+
+
+
it
..E j:
2 .0Y'J
.
E ;(~<&
""
'0
"S .5
.
. ;:;''1
/x
0
:t4'l
o
o XX Xx.,p>.0
x ~~..
/
<o:;~~.: x
o
30%
50%
draft,
draft.
95%
90%
reliability
reJiabiIJty
n 70% draft. 98% reliability
.0. 00'" + + 90% draft. 95% reliability
05 x 00
.)( 0 '"
05 2 5 1 2 5 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
(reservoir capacity / mean annual flow)
//
/
~
20
/
.~
r::+:
10
'"'"
, "
~'"
:0
o~ 2 0.0;;/.
..
ii
.0
o
1
,~,
~ 5
"'~~~
~ /~.:x~o
2
x
A
30%
50%
70%
draft,
draft,
draft.
95%
90%
98%
reliability
reliability
reliability
:x: 1 b.<.~
+ 90% draft, 95% reIJability
05 '" 4)(
IAli
05 2 5 1 2 5 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
( reservoir capacity / mean annual flow)
20
10
~
'"
E 5
:;:;
"'"
'"c:
o
.c
'"
::;
u
2 x 30% draft, 95% reliability
::; o 50% draft, 90% reliability
l:!. 70% draft, 98% reliability
+ 90% draft. 95% reliability
05 2 5 1 2 5 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
(reservoir capacity / mean annual flow)
20
! 10
'"
E
~
~
"
~ 2
u
+f'
~ 1 ,
;; h
c:
>..
'" 5 +t ,..
+ +
"
'"
"0
*
+
30% draft, 95% reliability
:;
o 2 50% draft, 90% reliability
Cl 70% draft. 98% reliability
+ 90% draft, 95% reliability
05
05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
(reservoir capacity / mean annual flow)
20
10
05
05 1 5 1 10 20
Gould's probability matrix estimate
( reservoir capacity / mean annual flow)
i'lT i'lC
2 v
(6.6)
T CV
166
D' D  (6.7)
V C
v v
EXAMPLE 6.1
2.05 (1.65)2
F 3
34(1.65 + 2.1)
0.003
That is, Eq. 6.1 predicts that, for a probability of failure of 5%,
there is a 90% chance that the realizable draft from the storage obtained
using the design draft will be 61% or more.
(ii) For the variables in Eq. 6.8 and results from Example 3.9,
0.18
6e v 0.23
168
~
l.64 2(0.68) (0.23) ]
D'
0.68
4   + 0.6 0.57 3 0.68 + 0.6
2
0.57 0.57 2
0.59
That is, Eq. 6.S predicts that the realizable draft which one can be
90% sure of being met is 59% or more.
6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS
6.6 NOTATION
CHAPTER 7
So far this text has been concerned wi th the storage capaci tydraft
probability relationship for a single reservoir. Many water supply systems
however consist of more than one reservoir and for these cases the single
reservoir technique is only a very approximate guide to the capacityyield
probability relationship of either an independent reservoir or the whole
system. In most cases of multireservoir systems, the extent of the
reservoir interconnection either among the storages themselves or at the
point of demand determines whether a single or a multireservoir analysis
is most appropriate.
CANBERRA
Gl
Cotter Dam , 9
4.7 Mm 3 \ \ "
480 km 2 G4<~;~
Proposed "I ~
Googong Dam\ ';
118 Mm 3 ~
Bendora Dam
'!.
10.7 Mm 3 Stream gauging
290 km 2 Station
Carin Dam
75Mm 3
200 km 2
(i) For the projected demand increase with time how long would
the system with the added reservoir operate at a given
level of reliability?
(iii) Given the~esent system and demands, at what time will its
reliability fall below an accepted design level? In other
words, when does the new reservoir need to be ready to add
to the system?
(iii) the operating rule for the system (Sec. 2.5) which
governs the proportion of the demand to be supplied;
All these components would be used in the model to simulate the entire
system on a monthly basis; that is, for each reservoir the operation would
be equivalent to a behaviour analysis.
The objectives of the simulation study could have been subject to some
constraints. For example, for a given maximum capacity of the proposed
reservoir determined by the site, the system could be modelled to determine
the level of demand which could be supplied without failure occurring. This
in turn would lead to an estimate of the design life of the system from the
population growth predictions.
Probability of failure.
The description above has given the historical approach to analysis
of a reservoir system. In recent years many water authorities have
accepted the concept of probability of failure as a more useful design
standard. The definition used for failure is not normally that of the
174
The traditional approach does not give the water planner or decision
maker any idea of the level of risk t of the system being unable to meet the
design demand during a future drought. Nor do they get any idea of the
likelihood of the new reservoir being required before the proposed
commissioning date.
One approach that has been used in recent years to answer these
questions is to carry out N simulation analyses as described above using
the N year historical sequence concatenated with itself and beginning each
separate analysis in a new year of the historical record and continuing for
N successive years. In this way the N analyses based on N years of
historical record provide N estimates of storage size. In addition, if
demand is superimposed in the form of an annual trend rather than being
considered constant at an extrapolated value, N estimates of the time
tIt is important that the reader not confuse risk with probability of
failure. Risk is related to the error in the estimate of the parameter
concerned, be it storage capacity for a given draft, or draft for a given
storage capacity. Probability of failure can be defined in several ways,
but in all of them it is a measure of the proportion of system failures
which can be expected over an extended period.
175
period from year one to the commissioning date of the proposed dam could be
made. The analysis is completed by ranking the N values of storage
capacity or time to commissioning, plotting them on probability paper and
reading off the value of storage or time to commissioning equivalent to
some probability of occurrence. A major limitation with this type of
approach is that the storage estimates and time values are not independent
and the probability associated with any estimate could be in (serious) error.
This difficulty is similar to that observed in the overlapping sequence
approach as discussed in Sec. 3.4.5.1.
(7.1)
Each flow value is related to the flow at all other sites in both the
present and preceding time intervals. The elements of [AJ and [BJ must be
177
At the end of this process there are thus twenty to thirty estimates
of the variable in question, enough for a designer to plot a distribution of
them and to calculate the confidence limits which surround the chosen value
(be it the mean value, or any other). The answer may be expressed in the
following way: for example, a new reservoir must be added to the existing
system within 2 years 3 months to maintain the design reliability of
supply. Contrast this answer wi th a behaviour analysis using historical
data which can only give a single estimate of each variable.
1.0
"~
'5
0 08
v
'
C>~
,S ca
v
V '
..c 0.6
E .
!/)
."'=
"'"
'0
v
5 0.4
>. Gi )(
~.D
:0
'"
..c 0.2
~
0..
2 4 6 8 10
Time to when Googong Dam is ready for use
(years)
7.5 NOTATION
REFERENCES
Barnes, F.B., 1954. Storage required for a city water supply. Journal of
the Institution of Engineers, Australia, 26 : 198.
Bibra, E.E. and Riggs, H.C.W., 1971. Victorian River Gaugings to 1969.
State Rivers and Water Supply Commission.
Burges, S.3. and Linsley, R.K., 1971. Some factors influencing required
reservoir storage. Journal of the HydI'aulics Division, ASCE,
97 (7) : 977991.
Doran, D.G., Lindner, M.A., and Wright, G.L., 1973. Spatially and serially
correlated streamflow synthesis. Hydrology Symposium 19?3, The
Institution of Engineers, Australia.
Dorfman, R., 1965. Formal models in the design of water resource systems.
Water Resources Research, 1 (3) : 329336.
Fathy, A. and Shukry, A.S., 1956. The problem of reservoir capacity for
longterm storage, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE.
82 (HY5) , Paper 1082.
Gani, J., 1955. Some problems in the theory of provisioning and of dams.
Biometrica, 42 : 179.
Gani, J. and Prabhu, N.U., 1958. Remarks on a dam with Poisson type inputs.
Australian JournaZ of AppZied Science, 10 : 113.
Gani, J. and Prabhu, N.U., 1959. The time dependent solutions for a
storage problem with Poisson inputs. Journal of Mathematics and
Mechanics, 8 : 653.
Gani, J. and Pyke, R., 1960. The content of a dam as the supremum of an
infinitely divisible process. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics,
9 : 639.
Ghosal, A., 1962. Finite dam with negative binomial inputs. Australian
Journal of Applied Science, 13 : 71.
Gould, B.W., 1961. Statistical methods for estimating the design capacity
of dams. Journal of the Institution of Engineers, Australia,
33 (12) : 405416.
Hall, W.A. and Dracup, J.A., 1970. Water Resources Systems Engineering,
McGrawHill, N.Y.
Hall, W.A. and Howell, D.T., 1970. Optimal allocation of stochastic water
supply. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Division, ASCE,
96 : 395402.
Hudson, H.E., and Roberts, W.J., 1955. 19521955 Illinois drought with
special reference to impounding reservoir design. Illinois State
Water Survey Bulletin, No. 43.
Hufschmidt, M.M., and Fiering, M.B., 1967. Simulation Techniques for the
Design of WaterResource Systems. Macmillan, London.
Hurst, H.E., Black, R.P. and Simaika, Y.M., 1965. Long Tepm Stopage.
Constable, London.
Joy, C.S., 1970. On the relationship between reservoir capacity and yield.
Thesis, (M. Eng. Sc.), Monash University.
Kendall, M.G. and Stuart, A., 1968. The Advanced Theory of Statistics,
Vol. 3, Charles Griffin and Co.
King, C.W., 1920. Supply of water for towns in New South Wales.
Transactions, The Institution of Engineers, Australia, 1 : 262.
Lloyd, E.H. and Odoom, S., 1964. Probability theory of reservoirs with
seasonal input. Journal of Hydrology, 2 : 1.
Maass, A., Hufschmidt, M.~l., Dorfman, R., Thomas, H.A., Marglin, S.A.,
and Fair, G.M., 1962. Design of Water Resources Systems.
MacMillan and Co., 620 pp.
McMahon, T.A. and Codner, G.P., 1973. Inadequate hydrologic data and
reservoir capacity. In Decisions with Inadequate Hydrologic Data
(D.A. Woolhiser, Ed.) Proceedings, Second International Hydrology
symposium, Fort Collins.
McMahon, T.A. and Miller, A.J., 1971. Application of the Thomas and
Fiering model to skewed hydrologic data. Water Resources Research,
7 (5) : 1338.
187
McMahon, T.A., Codner, G.P. and Philips, C., 1972. Single and multisite
operational hydrology. Nordic Hydrology, 3 : 214238.
McMahon, T.A., Codner, G.P. and Philips, C., 1973. A note on single and
mu1tisite operational hydrology. Nordic Hydrology, 4 : 5455.
Moran, P.A.P., 1954. A probability theory for dams and storage systems.
Australian Journal of Applied Science, 6 : 116.
Prabhu, N.U., 1958 (a). On the integral equations for the finite dam.
Quarterly Journal of Mathematics, Series 2, 9 : 183.
Prabhu, N.U., 1958 (b). Some exact results for the finite dam. Annals
of Mathematical Statistics, 29 : 1234.
Roesner, L.A. and Yevjevich, V.M., 1966. Mathematical models for time
series of monthly precipitation and monthly runoff. Hydrology
Paper 15, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Stall, J.B. and Neill, J.C., 1961. A partial duration series for low
flow analysis. Journal of Geophysical Research, 66 (12) : 41194125.
Thomas, H.A. and Burden, R.P., 1963. Operations Research in Water Quality
Management. Harvard Water Resources Group.
Wright, G.L., 1975. Mu1ti1ag Markov models for eastern Australian streams.
Hydrology Symposium 1975, The Institution of Engineers, Australia.
National Conference Publication 75/3.
APPENDIX A
RB P  ETB (Al)
B
RA PA  EO A (A2)
(A4)
P E (AS)
P
Predam evapotranspiration estimates are difficult to determine.
One apporach is through Eq. Al, thus:
(AI)
191
100~~+~~~~~
50~~~4~+
70
0.5~~~+4~4~+~
This figure was derived from Eq. 3.25 and computations were carried out for
a probability of failure of 5%. As an approximate check on the relationship,
values for 50% and 70% drafts are superimposed using Alexander's procedure
(Sec. 3.4.2). The fit is satisfactory. It should be noted that estimates
of critical periods of one year or less will not be very reliable.
Thus the final adjustment factor for net reservoir evaporation loss
is given by combining mean annual net evaporation loss, mean surface
reservoir area and drawdown period as follows:
The factor 0.7 relates the mean reservoir surface area exposed to eva
poration during a critical drawdown period to the total area at full supply
level. This factor is based on an analysis of the storage capacitysurface
area curves for six Australian dam sites: Bendora, Corin and Cotter dams
on the Cotter River (N.S.W.), proposed Sites 10 and 15 on the Mitchell
River (Vic.), and the Talbot dam site on the Thomson River (Vic.).
NOTATION
APPENDIX B
The results of five studies (Thomas and Burden 1963, Gould 1964,
Joy 1970, Perrins and Howell 1971 and McMahon and Codner 1973) which
examine the quantitative increase in storage required to compensate for the
independence assumption are summarized in Tables Bl, B2 and B3. Results are
for three levels of serial correlation 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3 and for a range of
models. For the studies of Thomas and Burden, Gould, and Perris and Howell
results have been generalized.
In looking over the tables, it can be seen that there are discre
pancies betl"een studies (and wi thin studies). Al though these are probably
attributable to the various distributions, parameters, and definition of
probability (or reliability) used in the analyses, it is difficult for the
user to isolate the adjustment factor for a particular river.
The lines in this figure are based on the average reservoir capacity
computed for 156 Australian streams using an historical behaviour analysis
assuming the reservoir to be alternatively initially empty and initially
full. This average value was divided by the equivalent Gould estimate
modified for monthly failures and the resulting ratio, which is the required
correction factor, was plotted against the annual serial correlation.
Separate analyses were carried out for 50% and 90% drafts but only one
probability of failure condition of 5% was examined (McMahon, 1976).
194
Draft (%)
Probabili ty Streamflow
of failure characteris ti cs
100 90 80 70 60 50
1/50 years
distribution
Cv
= 0.25
} 5 13* 0*
1/50 years
distribution
Cs = 1
} 11 17* 0*
Cv = 2
I
**
This study was based on a seasonal monthly model and adjustments
were made to the monthly serial correlations rather than the
annual one.
195
Draft (%)
Probabi l i ty of Streamflow
of failure characteristics
100 90 80 70 60 50
1/50 years
distribution
C
v
= 0.25 } 10 25* 0*
r
5% probabi Ii ty 0.7 5
(monthly) v
LN 2 C = 1.0 14
. . v
dls~n C = 1.9 22
butlon v
C = 2.1 25
v
r
Gould (1964) = theoretical simulation study (results generalized
 with respect to skewness)
5% probability
LN3 v ' 0.5 I
(annual)
distri C'v = I
I 45
bution
C = 2
v I I
Joy (1970)  theoretical simulation study using
Lloyd's model (1963 )
S% probabi l i ty Normal
distribution 22
C = 0.4
v
**
This study was based on a seasonal monthly model and adjustments
were made to the monthly serial correlations rather than the
annual one.
196
Draft (%)
Streamflow
Reliability
characteristics 100 90 80 70 60 50
lbe fit between the results for the five studies and the lines in
Fig. B.l is poor. This is because the individual studies are for specific
cond; tions whereas the lines arc generalized results from a range of
streams and conditions.
,.....
Draft (,)
90% 50%
...
... _Appendix B 1.8 0
+' 90%
* Gould 1964
(,)
A
* Thomas &
Burden 1963 1.6 c:
ell
u..
0
0 181 McMahon & '';:;
Codner 1973 (,)
Q)
Joy 1970
Perrins &
1.4:
0
0 Howell 1971 ()
1.2
*
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
0.8
I
11++;
Serial Correlation
~j
I
,,
~~
0.6
Index of Variability
NOTATION
C coeffjcient of variation
v
C coefficient of skewness
s
LN2 2 parameter Lognormal model
LN3 3 parameter Lognormal model
19!
APPENDIX C
X+b(X.X) (Cl)
1
X (C2)
E[ (X + b (X.  X)) 2] F
1
+ b 2E (F)  X2
X2 + 2bX2
(C4)
si+l
but b r s. and si+l s.
1
= 5
1
200
(e5)
X (C8)
Let c
E[X X) + c t
+ b(\
i
]2  X2
2
E[X2+ b [X.  X)2 + c 2t 2 + 2bX(X. X)
1 1 1
+ 2c X t. + 2bc (X. X) t.]  x2
1 1 1
COY (Xi+l \)
r (C13)
(VAR X.1+ 1) ~ (VAR Xi)
~
2
COY (X i + Xi)
l
2 (C14)
s
where COY (X i +l Xi) = covariance of Xi and Xi+l
NOTATION
b regression coeffici~nt
1
c s(l  r2)2
COV(\+l'\) covariance between X th and x.th flows
i+l 1
E (x) expected value of x
N(O,l) normal distribution with mean zero and variance equal to one
r serial correlation coefficient
S. standard deviation of flows in ith time period
1
t. normal random variate
1
VAR(X ) variance of flow sequence X.
i 1
X mean flow
generated flows
202
APPENDIX D
f(xl
f(Xjl I~
(D3)
f(x i )
Thus xi+l = Xi  ~ (D4)
1
and
20:
APPENDIX E
Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total
1940 43 19 14 33 44 44 42 60 93 58 31 28 509
1941 88 22 46 27 20 32 101 63 100 136 52 23 710
1942 14 12 12 12 112 149 347 215 316 232 149 64 1634
1943 37 20 15 76 51 52 110 139 201 241 113 52 1107
1944 22 12 12 17 64 39 64 43 39 46 26 17 401
Extracted from Bibra, E.E. and Riggs, H.C.W. (1971): Victorian River
Gaugings to 1969. State Rivers and Water Supply Commission.
204
AUTHOR INDEX
Alexander, G.N. 3945, 67, 147, 149, Franzini, J.B. 15, 186
151, 15960, 169, 181, 191
Gani, J. 71,72,183
Anderson, R.L. 118
Ghosa1, A. 72, IS3
Asfur, H. 180, 181
Gould, B.W. 3, 4950, 67, 8391, 105,
Australia, Department of National
1402, 152169, 179, lS34,
Resources. 11, lSI
1936
Barnes, F.B. 28, 110, 112, 181 Guglij, G. 140, 144, 159, 1634
Beard, L.R. 57, 1212, 129, 1324, Gumbel, E.J. 60, lS4
139, 159, 1767, 181
Hall, W.A. 180, IS4
Benson, M.A. 135, 181, 187
Hardison, G.H. 7, 15, 46, 59, 626,
Bibra, E.E. 181, 203
97100, 105, 159, 161, 163,
Black, R.P. 185
184, 197
Brittan, M.R. Ill, 181
Harms, A.G. 1245, 184
Brown, J.A.E. 7, lS2
Harris, R.A. 82, 83, 182, 184
Burden, R.P. 33, 1156, 188, 1935
Hazen, A. 27, 110, 184
Burges, S.J. 137, 182
Hilferty, M.M. 115, 122
Campbell, T.H. 1245, 184 Howell, D.T. ISO, 184, 187, 192,
Chow, V.T. 121, 182, 190 196 7
Codner, G.P. 147, 1767, 182, 186, Hudson, H.E. 55, 184
187, 1925 Hufschmidt, M.M. 135, 184, 186
Crawford, N.H. 7, 182 Hurst, H.E. 3132, Ill, 1845
Crosby, D.S. 177, 182
Jackson, B.B. 107, 183
Dear1ove, R.E. 83, 182 Jarvis, C.L. 82, 185
Dincer, T. 467, 49, 51, 67, 15960, Joy, C.S. 32, 33,90, 91, 147, 185,
163, 169 lS7, 1936
Doran, D.G. 83, 91, 177, 182 Julian, P.R. Ill, ISS
Dorfman, R. 135, IS2, 186
Kartvelishvili, N.A. 144, ISS
Dracup, J .A. ISO, lS4
Kendall, M.G. 114, ISS
Fair, G.M. 186 King, C.W. 21, 185
Fathy, A. 33, IS2 Kirby, W. 116, 132, 185
Feller, W. 31, lS2 K1emes, V. 91, 102, 107, 185
Fletcher, S.J. 179 Kottegoda, K. T. 108, 109, 125, 185
Fiering, M.B. 17, 33, 35, 107, 1145,
Langbein, W.B. 9697, 185
124, 126, 135, 158, 176, 1767,
Law, F. 67, 186
183, 184, 188
Lindner, M.A. 182
206
Linsley, R.K. 7, 15, 137, 182, 186 Stall, J.B. 55, 1512, 188
Lloyd, E.H. 82, 83, 186 Stuart, A. 114, 185
Sudler, C.H. 110, 188
Maas, A. Ill, 135, 186
Svanidze, G.G. 140, 144, 159, 188
McMahon, T.A. 15, 25, 44, 935, 105,
116, 126, 134, 147, 153, 159, Teoh, C.T. 90, 147, 159
1624, 169, 177, 178, 182, 185, Thorn, II.S.C. 41, 188
186, 187, 1936 Thomas, H.A. 33, 1146, 124, 126,
Maddock, T. 177, 182 158, 175, 177, 186, 188, 1935
Manoe1, P.J. 180, 187 Thompson, R.W.S. 53, 147, 1501, 188
Marglin, S.A. 186 Tintner, G. 114, 189
Martin, R.O.R. 59, 184
United States Corps of Engineers,
Matalas, N.C. 1178, 125, 135, 176,
20, 57, 58, 121, 176, 189
181, 187
United States Geological Survey,
Me1entijcvich, M.J. 101, 187
60, 61
Miller, A.J. 116, 186
Venetis, C. 83, 189
Moran, P.A.P. 3, 713, 813, 90,
96, 187 Waitt, F.W.F. 33, 368,147,1501,
Moss, M.E. 35, 187 189
SUBJECT INDEX
Active storage 14
Alexander's method 38, 67, 169
evaluation of 149, 159
Annual flows
parameters 13
generating model for III
ARIMA model 125
Design
preliminary 2, 169
procedures in current use 5, 173
final 2, 169
Design process 2
Demand 15
allowance for increase in 174
208
Hardison's method
for combination of carryover and seasonal storage 65
for probability routing 97, 105
evaluation of 159
Hurst phenomenon 31, 108
importance of 125
Hurst's storage procedure 31, 67
Independent series 55
evaluation of 151
vs. overlapping series 57
Index of variability 9, 98
Infinite storage 14
Inflows 6
and outflows, occurrence of 72, 78
distribution of 7 (see also Distribution of flows)
estimated 7
generated 107, 111, 114
sampling error of 6, 11
statistical parameters of 7, 11, 108
Initial conditions
effect of full assumption 25
independence of effect of 82
Operating rule 16
for multireservoir systems 178
Outflows 15
211
Samp Ii ng error
of draft estimate 164
of flows 6, 11
of storage estimate 164
Seasonal storage 14, 65
212
Variability, measures of 9
Yield 15
adjustments for serial correlation 197
This Page Intentionally Left Blank