Urban Water Journal, 2014

Vol. 11, No. 7, 532–542, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2013.831909

RESEARCH ARTICLE
Areal rainfall intensity distribution over an urban area and its
effect on a combined sewerage system
M. Zawilski* and A. Brzezińska
Institute of Environmental Engineering, Lodz University of Technology, Al. Politechniki 6, Łódź, Poland
(Received 10 July 2012; accepted 31 July 2013)

The application of 21 pluviometers over the whole area of Łódź, Poland, enabled an examination of areal distribution of
intense rainfalls during 2010– 2011. On the basis of collected data the distribution of rainfall intensity was analysed and a
circular zone model with exponential shape in all directions has been proposed for describing rain storms. Also, the velocity
of storm zone movement between 2 and 30 km/h was determined. Using the SWMM 5.0 software, adapted for non-standard
use, runoff from three real catchments and combined storm overflow discharge was examined for selected measured
rainfalls. An effect of storm zone range and movement was also studied for the same catchments using model storms. It was
confirmed that using data from the city pluviometric network enables significantly better simulation results for CSO
overflows to be obtained compared to an option based on a single pluviometric station, especially for large catchments
greater than 200 hectares.
Keywords: combined sewerage system; SWMM software; rainfall-runoff modelling; urban raingauge network; areal
distribution of rainfall

1. Introduction irregularity of rainfall intensity is usually observed inside

Rainfall distribution can have a major effect on the
functioning of combined and storm sewerage networks.
Design storms are usually elaborated on the basis of single
raingauge stations. However, for large urban catchments,
locally significant fluctuations of rainfall intensity can be
influential in the design process since an application of a
single block design storm inevitably leads to oversizing of
sewer cross-sections. Climate change effects are also
observed (IPPC 2007, Russo et al. 2011). A tendency of
occurrence of more and more intense rainfalls has been
reported and serious problems for urban drainage are
expected in the near future (Willems et al. 2012a, 2012b).
Previous investigations concerning artificial block
rainfalls moving above model catchments (Haug 1970,
Niemczynowicz 1984, Stephenson 1984) as well as
Gaussian shaped rain cells for real catchments (de Lima
and Singh 2002, Vaes et al. 2002, Willems and Berlamont
2002) showed major differences in modelling results
obtained for a uniform static design rainfall and a rainfall
moving in certain directions in relation to the main flow
direction. Recent studies using GIS and radar-rainfall
measurements make it possible to consider spatial rainfall
distribution in a more realistic way (Giguere et al. 2005,
Barco et al. 2008). This distribution is observed even for
small areas (Schilling 1984, Faurès 1995). A considerable
convective storm cells (Stephenson 1984, Mutzner 1991,
Wheater et al. 2000, Hershfield 2007).
However, analyses for real urban catchments are still
limited. For instance, there is a need to explain the role of
rainfall distribution and movement concerning the
hydraulic loading of the combined sewerage on larger
urban catchments as well as the CSO discharges and
volumes. Also, the areal reduction factor for design storms
used for urban catchments of different areas is still
discussed (Desbordes et al. 1984, Giguere et al. 2005).
This paper focuses on functioning analyses of the real
extended urban catchments equipped with combined
sewerage system in relation to the areal distribution of
continuously monitored rainfall.
2. The research purpose and scope
This paper focuses on possibilities of using areal rainfall
data obtained from a city’s pluviometric monitoring
system for the improvement of urban combined sewer
systems modelling. Model calculations were made for
three different urban catchments in Łódź. Analyses for real
rainfall data gathered during two years of measurements
have been made. One of the scopes of the paper was the
demonstration of differences between a traditional

*Corresponding author. Email: marek.zawilski@p.lodz.pl

q 2013 Taylor & Francis
 Urban Water Journal
application of point rainfall and spatially distributed
rainfall characteristics in regard to the modelling of urban
sewerage systems.
The second scope was an attempt to elaborate a
method of creating a design model for moving storms
taking measured rainfall data into consideration and to
discuss the model results for real urban catchments.
3. The system of rainfall monitoring in Łódź
Built in 1925– 1965, the Łódź combined system needs
upgrading because of its temporal hydraulic overloading
causing frequent combined overflows and surcharging of
trunk sewers in certain locations. In the past, the only
option possible was monitoring of precipitation with the
use of 3 –4 raingauges.
Installation of 21 raingauges in the area of Łódź city in
2010 enabled analyses of storm cell patterns as well as
studying their movement. This may confirm previous
authors’ analyses devoted to rainfall intensity distribution for
the Łódź area (Zawilski and Brzezińska 2004). The
raingauge network consists of 18 city tipping-bucket
pluviometers type A-STER and three similar additional
instruments type SEBA RG 50 located over the area of 16 £
16 km (Figure 1). The average distance between raingauges
is about 3 km in the city centre. The measurement results
obtained in 5-minute-intervals with the rainfall depth
resolution of 0.1 mm are continuously transmitted to
the main server using the GPRS technology. In 2010–2011,
Figure 1. Arrangement of raingauges on the city map.
533
31 rainfall events were well recorded with the use of the
raingauge network (Figure 1).
4. Elaboration of rainfall measurements
4.1. Statistical analysis of rainfall depth
The rainfall data gathered in 2010– 2011 have been
transformed into digital files containing intensities
expressed in mm/h measured every five minutes, covering
the whole city area.
In Figure 2 the 2-year statistics of measured rainfall
depth is shown. All intense rainfalls of a depth greater than
6 mm have been selected. Vertical segments represent
minimum and maximum depth for all active raingauges of
the city monitoring network (cf. bars in the upper part of
the plot). The boxes represent the mean depth value for
those raingauges and the depth recorded by the only
official raingauge located at the airport, at the city
outskirts, operated by the Polish Institute of Meteorology
and Water Economy.
The above statistics reveal distinct differences in
rainfall depth across the city area. Especially, rainfall
characteristics obtained at the single airport station cannot
be accepted as reliable for analyses of the whole urban
catchment. For instance, for the event of 26 April 2010
both depths (mean city and airport values) were very
similar (7.2 and 6.7, respectively). But for the event of 23
July 2010 the situation was completely different and the
values were recorded as 10.0 and 0.0 (no rainfall at the
airport).
534 M. Zawilski and A. Brzezińska
Figure 2. Statistics for rainfall depth for Łódź urban area.
4.2. Areal distribution and movement of rainfall
The transformation has been accomplished using the
SURFER v.10 software and with application of the kriging
method of interpolation. The appropriate grid was
constructed which contains 200 £ 200 nodes, equivalent
to a space resolution of about 80 m. Such resolution allows
for direct assignment of interpolated rainfall intensity to
small sub-catchments and, as a consequence, a detailed
rainfall-runoff model was produced. The kriging method is
often used for such a purpose (cf. Bastin et al. 1984, Curtis
and Clyde 1999, Earls and Dixon 2007, Gupta and
Lokanadham 2008), and also for other geostatistical
calculations. It was checked by the authors of this paper
using the standard cross validation method available in the
SURFER software that among proposed interpolation
algorithms, linear kriging had given most credible and
correct rainfall patterns on the city map and minimum
interpolation error. This procedure is also recommended
by the producer of the software (Galon 2009). One
example of the obtained rainfall contour maps is shown in
Figure 3.
Rainfall gradients were determined for most of the
intense events (Figure 4). The maximum gradient always
was observed near the maximum of intensity and a distinct
correlation between the two parameters can be shown. In
Łódź case, rainfall intensity changes by 25% of its
maximum over the distance of 1 kilometre.
The use of small (less than about 10 hectares) sub-
catchments (at least for the purpose of this paper) was
necessary, because this option allows avoidance of the
additional calculation of the correct sub-catchment rainfall
intensity. On the other hand, aggregation of sub-
catchments into greater areas introduces an additional
problem (and possible calculation error) connected with
the reduction of numerous small diameter sewers.
Next, rainfall movement across the city catchment was
investigated. In many cases, to complete the analysis,
assumptions concerning individual storm cells were
needed. It was assumed that the mean velocity and
direction of storm cells result from the movement of their
centre of mass. Figure 5 summarizes the outcomes of
described analyses.
The vectors shown in Figure 5 represent the average
direction and velocity of moving storm cells.
In the case of Łódź, azimuths of storm movement
embrace mainly the sector from N-W to N-E and, in
particular, no storms coming from North to South were
observed. This tendency has different significance for the
whole sewerage system because the main flow direction of
sewers is from NE to SW. Therefore, there is some
potential to enforce the runoff in sewers if a storm cell
passes over the city area in that direction.
The storm cells usually form slightly oblate ellipses
on the terrain plane but it was impossible to discern any
 Urban Water Journal 535

Figure 3. Contours of rainfall intensity in mm/h for one of the storms recorded in 2010.

correlation between the orientation of their major axes main directions (Figure 6). This is the same result as
and direction of movement. The spatial shape of the that obtained by Stephenson (1984). As yet, the
storm cells could be approximated with the use of occurrence of typical rainfall linear fronts was not
exponential function of their cross-sections for four detected.

Figure 5. Velocity and direction of storm cells observed in

Figure 4. Maximum gradients of rainfall intensity. 2010– 2011.
536 M. Zawilski and A. Brzezińska
Figure 6. Example cross-section of one of the stormcells.
For modelling purposes, an own modified formula of
rainfall intensity distribution inside a circular storm cell
was proposed:
 
d Numerous sub-catchments (2112) in the case of B-1
i ¼ i max EXP 2
a catchment were created in order to avoid systematic errors
where
imax – maximum rainfall intensity in the cell centre;
d – distance from this centre;
a – empirical distance parameter.
The approximation made for 29 selected, well
monitored individual storm cells using Equation (1) gave
the following results for the parameter ‘a’:
Number of storm cells analysed: n ¼ 29
Extreme values of ‘a’: 1748 – 4713 m
Mean values of ‘a’ ¼ 3016 m
Standard deviation of ‘a’ s ¼ 628 m
Mean coefficient of determination for fitting ‘a’,
r2 ¼ 0.83
According to Equation (1), the radius of a storm cell can be
assumed as 2.3a, when the intensity decreases up to 10% of its
maximum value. For a ¼ 2.5–3.5 km in most cases analysed,
the diameter of storm zone can be assessed as 11–16 km.
The described assumption should be verified after
gathering more monitoring data in future years. However,
it is sufficient to perform the analyses presented in the next
sections of the paper.
4.3. Real urban catchments tested
On the basis of analyses of recent rainfall events, rainfall-
runoff modelling for three different preliminary calibrated
real urban catchments, equipped with the combined
sewerage system, was possible. The detailed data
concerning the catchments are presented in Table 1
(Figure 7, cf. also Figure 1).
ð1Þ
due to the sub-catchment integration, mentioned earlier.
Therefore, all side sewers and sub-catchments assigned to
them have been incorporated into the SWMM model.
5. Methodology of modelling
5.1. Principles of modelling
The modelling with the use of areal distribution of rainfall
intensity was performed in two options: a real rainfall and
a model rainfall. For a real phenomenon rainfall data can
be taken from the monitoring system directly but in the
case of pluviometric point measurements they have to be
translated into pluviographs for all subcatchments.
For a model rainfall, one should input a storm cell
moving across the investigated catchment in a chosen
direction and with a chosen velocity. Moreover, the
intensity inside the cell should be known for instance as a
function of the distance from the cell centre.
5.2. Processing of measurement data for real events
Real measured rainfalls were applied for modelling of the
flow and volume at the outflow of two urban catchments.
Additionally, discharge and volume via CSOs situated at
the outlets of both catchments were calculated.
For this purpose, the widely used and known EPA
SWMM 5.0 software was used. To avoid additional
simplification errors, real rainfall intensity was input on
 Urban Water Journal 537

Table 1. Parameters of two urban catchments used for rainfall-runoff modelling.

Catchment
Parameter Unit B-1 J-7 J-1
Approximate dimensions km 6£4 2.6 £ 2.2 2.2 £ 1.5
Total area hectares 1151 357 211
Impervious area hectares 481 114 70
Imperviousness % 42 32 33
Sewer density* m/ha 83.6 72.4 98.6
Average sewer slope ‰ 11.0 13.3 4.6
Mean dry weather flow** m3/s 0.32 0.14 0.07
Main flow direction from NE to SW from N to S from W to E
CSO type side side side
CSO weir length m 12.7 5.8 4.9
Number of sub-catchments 2112 319 494
Range of sub-catchment area hectares 0.02– 4.94 0.05 – 16.88 0.01 – 7.83
Notes: *only main street collectors were considered; **diurnal variations of dry weather flow according to continuous measurements were considered.

each sub-catchment during several hours of rainfall event. . Option 1

For each storm event it was necessary to elaborate a storm
In order to compare movement effects for rainfalls of
file using a format readable for the SWMM software.
the same return period, the mean intensity in a certain
In order to create an appropriate input data file, an own
period of time must be independent from the movement
auxiliary software has been elaborated which uses the
velocity. Therefore, the radius of a storm zone must
results of kriging interpolation, so that intensity values in
proportionally be changed (by matching the parameter a)
grid nodes are assigned to the nearest sub-catchments. In
in relation to the velocity (Figure 9). For the exponential
other words, each sub-catchment receives its own
shape of intensity cross-section the integration of Equation
pluviograph with a time resolution of 5 minutes, next
(1) with d ¼ 0.5·vt leads to an expression:
used for calculation of runoff (Figure 8).
20:5vt



1 2 EXP a
5.3. Mathematical model of spatially distributed imean ¼ imax 0:5vt
ð2Þ
rainfalls a

For the purpose of analysing the movement effect of

stormcells, other modelling options have been prepared.
For both catchments, model storms were passed across the
investigated areas as moving with three velocities and
several directions described by the true azimuth. The
circular shape of storm cells was assumed and their
intensity was calculated from Equation (1). However, in
this case, unlike block rainfalls’ case, the rainfall intensity
varies for each particular sub-catchment over the course of
time. Therefore, for better understanding of the movement
effects, two particular options were checked.
where
imean, imax –mean and maximum rainfall intensity,
respectively;
v – rainfall zone velocity;
t – time of observation around the storm cell centre.
So, the parameter a must be proportional to the
expression 0.5vt if the mean intensity should be unchanged
for a given velocity v and a period of time t.
For the presented modelling, maximum rainfall
intensity was assumed as 70 mm/h, and a ¼ 2500 m for

Figure 7. Schemes of the analysed urban catchments (RG – raingauge).

538 M. Zawilski and A. Brzezińska

Figure 8. Catchment B-1 implemented in the model SWMM and some examples of model pluviographs at different subcatchments.

v ¼ 10 km/h, which for t ¼ 15 minutes gives imean ¼ 55.1 of movement was chosen in the main coincident (azimuth
mm/h (Figure 9). This value is adequate to the return 180 deg. for J-7 and 245 deg. for B-1, respectively) and the
period of about 2 years according to the recent Polish IDF opposite direction of sewage flow.
formulas. Two other velocities, v ¼ 3 km/h and 30 km/h
were also examined. This adjusting option has been called
by the authors ‘rainfall range accordingly to velocity
(RRAV)’.

. Option 2
According to the rainfall zone velocity, the intensity of
rainfall instead of zone radius can be changed in Equation
(2). In the presented analyses, the intensity varied
proportionally to the velocity in order to obtain the same
precipitation depth of 17.5 mm. This depth results from
Equation (2) for the same parameters as given above
(i.e. imax ¼ 70 mm/h, a ¼ 2500 and v ¼ 10 km/h). Thus,
the appropriate maximum rainfall intensity for v ¼ 3 and
30 km/h are equal to 59.3 mm/h and 106.4 mm/h,
respectively. This option has been called by the authors
‘rainfall intensity according to velocity (RIAV)’.
The above described model storm cells were input to
the SWMM model as moving with the mentioned
velocities 3, 10 and 30 km/h and passing the geometric
centre of both catchments at noon. The basic true azimuth Figure 9. An example of the model rainfall.
 Urban Water Journal 539

Figure 10. Modelling results for real rainfalls in comparison to point rainfalls.

6. Results and discussion same for all sub-catchments, and for real, spatially
6.1. Real storms distributed, moving rainfall input as individual intensity
for every sub-catchment.
For some of the real storms it turned out that two cases
Summarised statistical results of modelling for the
may happen:
three catchments are presented in Table 2.
i) the storm cell centre passes near the catchment From Table 2 differences between the three analysed
centre; the areal rainfall intensity and depth are less catchments are clearly noticeable. Firstly, as expected,
than the values resulted from the point rainfall; this is a mean error and coefficient of determination are dependent
standard case; on catchment area, i.e. better fitting can be obtained for
ii) the storm cell centre passes nearby the investigated smaller areas. Secondly, statistically general good trend
catchment but influences it significantly; the areal results for both options were detected (cf. the coefficient
rainfall intensity and depth can be greater than the ‘a’). In particular cases assuming a local point rainfall for
values resulted from the point rainfall measured inside the whole catchment led to completely wrong modelling
the catchment; this is a rarer case but should be taken results, e.g. lack of CSO when it was recorded as a
into consideration for selected storm events. significant one or generation of CSO, de facto, not
recorded. In general, however, the observed results were
Such effects are presented in Figure 10 – the first case randomly influenced by rainfall characteristics taken to
(left) and the second case (right). calculations for the three catchments.
As can be seen from Figure 10, for the option (i) the For catchment J1 the least difference between the two
consideration of areal distribution of rainfall intensity modelling options were found. This was due to the
allows for better agreement of the calculated and relatively smaller catchment area (about 200 hectares) and
measured flow. However, for the option (ii) taking the
point rainfall for calculations leads to a completely
wrong result – underestimation of flow, whereas Table 2. Comparison of modelling results for the point and
considering the rainfall distribution over the catchment areal rainfall.
again allows for obtaining quite good outcomes. In this
particular case, the intense storm affected the southern Catchment no Option ME [%] r2 a
part of the catchment only and a small amount of rain B1 17 point (single gauge) 38* 0.81 1.08
was detected near its centre. areal 24 0.85 1.00
Simulation of the sewerage systems with the use of J7 17 point (single gauge) 40* 0.81 1.04
SWMM software was performed for all recorded intense areal 27 0.89 0.97
J1 16 rainfall interpolated for 27 0.95 1.10
storms (not always the same for the three catchments, as the catchment centre
resulted from moving storms) rejecting the dates for which areal 25 0.94 1.05
there was a lack of data for more than two raingauges
Notes: no – number of CSO events; ME – mean absolute error of peak
situated in the vicinity of the catchment analysed. overflow; * large errors for some events were noted; r2 – coefficient of
For three analysed catchments two options of determination for modelled and measured maximum overflow; a – slope
modelling were made: for point rainfall input as the coefficient for linear fitting.
540 M. Zawilski and A. Brzezińska
Figure 11. Effect of storm movement direction and velocity onto maximum outflow and volume of CSO for catchment B-1 (RRAV
option).
an application of a new-generation, precisely calibrated
flow-meter installed in the CSO chamber.
6.2. Model storms
For model storm cells the results depend on the velocity
and direction of their movement; the shape of a catchment
influences both total runoff and CSO outflow and volume
(Figure 11).
Combination of the storm cell range, velocity and
direction gives a distinct bias for the elongated catchment
B-1 and the polar plot of the relative total flow (RTF)
resembles the catchment shape. The factor close to unity
for the main flow direction results also from the presence
of industrial areas of considerable imperviousness in the
south-west region of this catchment.
For the RIAV option one can obtain slightly different
outcomes, usually a few percent less maximum catchment
flow and CSO. However, these values at the catchment
outlet were up to 30% less for v ¼ 3 km/h which can be
attributed to the decreased rainfall intensity.
Similar results, but with less directional bias, were
obtained for catchment J-7 which is not as elongated and
smaller. Only for v ¼ 3 km/h total flow at the catchment
outlet and CSO volume turned out to be 15% and 35% less
for coincident and opposite direction of sewage flow,
respectively. For this catchment, directional bias was
insignificant for greater velocities.
From Figure 11, a distinct effect of the catchment
shape is noticeable. This effect is different in comparison
to other options of a model storm, for instance for a
moving linear rainfall front (de Lima and Singh 2002,
Vaes et al. 2002). For a radial zone of rainfall, the
direction of rainfall zone movement is important because
it determines the range of the catchment which is
embraced with rainfall. In the analysed case, if the rainfall
zone moves along the catchment and passes its centre
(at an azimuth of 245 degrees), the whole catchment
produces runoff. Moreover, in such a case, the rainfall
zone with its centre of intensity passes the most
impervious, south-west part of the catchment (cf. Figures 7
and 8). For a perpendicular direction of movement (at an
azimuth of 155 degrees), south-west and north-east parts
of the catchment do not receive intense rainfall which
leads to a decrease of outfall discharge. This observation
is valid both for maximum discharge and CSO volume
(cf. Figure 11).
For storm cells moving in the main flow direction on a
catchment, the increased final flow at the catchment outlet
has been frequently reported. This effect can be assigned to
the phenomenon of rainfall movement in-parallel to the
sewage velocity in sewers. However, in the analysed case of
real catchments, this particular effect was not crucial because
main and side sewers have various flow direction, usually
different from the main flow direction from NE to SW.
7. Conclusions
Taking the presented results into consideration the
following conclusions can be drawn:
. Statistical elaboration of intense rainfalls recorded
during two years on the analyzed large urban
area revealed significant differences between
the data obtained for city raingauge network and
the single official monitoring station, located
on the outskirts of the city. This leads to a
conclusion that the consideration of spatial rainfall
distribution is necessary for large urban sewerage
catchments.
. Additionally, a strong gradient of intensity for storm
cells of heavy events was determined (its value is
 Urban Water Journal
correlated with the intensity and is equal to about
25% of maximum intensity per kilometer).
. The mean velocity of storm zone movement of 3 –
30 km/h was found, which value can be used for
modelling the city sewerage system.
. For real spatially distributed rainfalls the results of
modelling CSO flows depend on catchment area;
negligible differences between measured and mod-
elled flow were observed for the catchment of 200
hectare area. Significant differences were typical for
larger areas (up to 1100 hectares). Non consideration
of areal rainfall distribution usually leads in such
cases to an overestimation of CSO flows and
sometimes to completely unacceptable results.
. for calculation purposes the design storms can be
approximated as circular zones approximated by the
exponential function with consideration of the storm
movement velocity; this needs adjusting the range of
rainfall zone or maximum rainfall intensity in order
to obtain concordance with the rainfall depth of a
design storm;
. for a model of circular zones, the effect of the
movement on the maximum flow and volume of the
outlet runoff has been confirmed. The effect depends
not only on the catchment area itself but also on the
shape of the catchment because the storm zone
cannot embrace the whole catchment in many cases;
final modelling results for a real catchment strongly
depend on both range and velocity of the moving
storm as well as on its path direction, whereas the
range of a rainfall zone is, for real urban catchments,
more important than the movement velocity.
Acknowledgements
Scientific research has been carried out as a part of the Project
‘Innovative recourses and effective methods of safety improve-
ment and durability of buildings and transport infrastructure in
the sustainable development - reduction of pollutant emission
from urbanized areas into the environment’, no. POIG.01.01.02-
10-106/09-00 financed by the European Union from the
European Fund of Regional Development based on the
Operational Program of the Innovative Economy.
References
Ball, J.E. and Luk, K.C., 1998. Modelling spatial variability of
rainfall over a catchment. Journal of Hydrologic Engineer-
ing, 3, 122– 130.
Barco, J., Wong, K.M., and Stenstrom, M.K., 2008. Automatic
calibration of the U.S. EPA SWMM model for a large urban
catchment. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, ASCE, 134
(4), 466– 474.
Bastin, G., et al., 1984. Optimal estimation of the average areal
rainfall and optimal selection of rain gauge locations. Water
Resources Research, 20 (4), 463– 470.
Curtis, D.C. and Clyde, B.S., 1999. Comparing spatial
distributions of rainfall derived from rain gages and radar.
Journal of Floodplain Management. Available from: http://
541
www.onerain.com/includes/pdf/whitepaper/Spatial Dist of
Rainfall.pdf
Desbordes, M., Raous, P., and Trévisiol, Y., 1984. Areal
reduction factors on short times and space intervals. Water
Science and Technology, 16 (8 – 9), 189– 198.
de Lima, J.L.M.P. and Singh, V.P., 2002. The influence of the
pattern moving rainstorms on overland flow. Advances in
Water Resources, 25, 817– 828.
de Michele, C., Kottegoda, N.T., and Rosso, R., 2002. IDAF
(intensity-duration-area-frequency) curves of extreme rain-
fall: a scaling approach. Water Science and Technology, 45
(2), 83– 90.
Earls, J. and Dixon, B., 2007. Spatial interpolation of rainfall data
using ArcGIS: A comparative study. In: Proceedings of the
27th Annual ESRI International User Conference, 31
October, San Diego, CA. Available from: http://
proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/proc07/papers/papers/
pap_ 1451.pdf
Fang, T. and Ball, J.E., 2008. Calibration of a catchment
modelling system with spatially variable parameters. In:
Proceedings of the 11th Int. Conf. on Urban Drainage
(ICUD), 31 August-5 September, Edinburgh, UK. Inter-
national water Association. Available from: http://www.
researchgate.net/publication/229036387_Calibration_of_a_
Catchment_Modelling_System_with_Spatially_Variable_
Parameters/file/3deec5151843dd073e.pdf
Faurès, J.-M., et al., 1995. Impact of small-scale spatial rainfall
variability on runoff modelling. Journal of Hydrology, 173,
309– 326.
Galon, Z., 2009. Surfer manual. Kraków: Gambit.
Giguere, P., et al., 2005. Dallas’ innovative design storm
approach incorporates radar-rainfall analysis of storm size
and shape. In: 78th Annual Water Environment Federationw
Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC), 29
October-2 November, Washington, DC. Water Environment
Federation. 6869 – 6881. Available from: http://www.
ingentaconnect.com/content/wef/wefproc/2005/00002005/
000000 08/art00014
Gupta, K. and Lokanadham, B., 2008. Characterization of spatial
and temporal distribution of monsoon rainfall in Mumbai,
India. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference
on Urban Drainage (ICUD), 31 August-5 September,
Edinburgh, UK. International Water Association. Available
from: http://web.sbe.hw.ac.uk/staffprofiles/bdgsa/11th_Inter
national_Conference_on_Urban_Drainge_CD/ICUD08/pdfs/
208.pdf
Haug, H.P., 1970. Einflüsse auf die Ableitung und den Überlauf
von Regenwasser. [Influences on the drainage and the
overflow of storm water]. Forschungs- und Entwickelungsin-
stitut für Industrie- und Siedlungswasserwirtschaft sowie
Abfallwirtschaft e.V. in Stuttgart.
Hershfeld, D.M., 2007. A note on areal rainfall definition.
Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 5 (4),
49 – 55.
IPCC, 2007. In: Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and A.
Reisinger, eds. Climate change 2007: Synthesis report.
Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC.
Lynch, S.D. and Schulze, R.E., 1995. Techniques for estimating
areal daily rainfall. In: Proceedings of the ESRI User
Conference, 22 – 26 May, Palm Springs, CA, USA. A CD
ROM collection of papers. Environmental Systems Research
Institute.
Mutzner, H., 1991. The significance of areal rainfall distribution
for flows from a very small urban drainage catchment. Atmos.
Res., 27, 99 –107.
542 M. Zawilski and A. Brzezińska
Niemczynowicz, J., 1984. Investigation of the influence of
rainfall movement of runoff hydrograph. Part I. Simulation
on conceptual catchment. Nordic Hydrology, 15, 57– 70.
Pelczer, I.J. and Cisneros-Iturbe, H.L., 2008. Identification of
rainfall patterns over the Valley of Mexico. In: Proceedings
of the 11th International Conference on Urban Drainage
(ICUD), 31 August-5 September. Edinburgh, UK. Available
from: http://web.sbe.hw.ac.uk/staffprofiles/bdgsa/11th_Inter
national_Conference_on_Urban_Drainage_CD/ICUD08/
pdfs/371.pdf
Russo, B., et al., 2011. Flood risk assessment through a 2D-1D
coupled modeling approach including impact of climate
change in Barcelona. In: Proceedings of the 12th
International Conference on Urban Drainage, 10 – 15
September, Porto Alegre, Brazil. Available from: http://web.
sbe.hw.ac.uk/staffprofiles/bdgsa/temp/12th%20ICUD/PDF/
PAP005270.pdf
Schilling, W., 1984. Effect of spatial rainfall distribution on
sewer flows. Water Science and Technology, 16 (8/9),
177– 188.
Stephenson, D., 1984. Kinematic study of effects of storm
dynamics on runoff hydrographs. Water SA, 10 (4), 189–196.
Vaes, G., Willems, P., and Berlamont, J., 2002. Moving design
storms for combined sewer systems. In: Eric W. Strecker,
Wayne C. Huber, eds. Proceedings of the 9th International
Conference on Urban Drainage, Global Solutions for Urban
Drainage, 8 – 13 September, Portland, USA. a CD-ROM
Collection. International Water Association. Available from:
http://www.asce.org/Product.aspx?ID=2147486789&Product
ID=5279
Wheater, H.S., et al., 2000. Spatial-temporal rainfall fields:
modelling and statistical aspects. Hydrology and Earth
System Sciences, 4 (4), 581– 601.
Willems, P. and Berlamont, J., 2002. Accounting for the spatial
rainfall variability in urban modelling applications. Water
Science and Technology, 45 (2), 105– 112.
Willems, P., et al., 2012a. Impacts of climate change on rainfall
extremes and urban drainage. London: IWA Publishing.
ISBN: 9781780401256. Available from: http://www.iwapub
lishing.com/template.cfm?name=isbn9781780401256
Willems, P., et al., 2012b. Climate change impact assessment on
urban rainfall extremes and urban drainage: methods and
shortcomings. Atmospheric Research, 103, 106– 118.
Zawilski, M. and Brzezińska, A., 2004. Characteristics of rain
falls necessary for design and upgrading of urban drainage
systems. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference
on Urban Drainage Modelling (UDM’04), 15 – 17 September
2004, Dresden, 643– 650.
Copyright of Urban Water Journal is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.