t, ffirdTRE

627.131.15 hw¡¡,æn4rs u&HtsÏtÊlt¡fi ci¡

MET
A method for estimating
design peak discharge
(Technical Memorandum No. 61)

þ Planning and Technical Seruices

l¡J Water and Soil Division
€ Ministry of Works and Development
to
Fl
a

\
(l)
Fl
N
a
Wellington 1980
{\l
'\C)

I
 A METHOD FOR ESTIMATING

DESIGN PEAK DISCHARGE

(Techni ca'l Memorandum No. 61)

Pl anni ng and Techni ca'l Servi ces

Water and Soil Division
Ministry of Works and Development

WELLINGTON 19BO

HYDBOLOGY CÉNTFùfi,

L:-^"1¡í f': [qtft$ $fIEFICE 0E}jTHE

lu ; " "
-#i-ïffi $Tü[l tll
Ê'tH I [J R
 A method for estimating design peak discharqe
(Technical Memorandum ruô. 61)

Planning and Technical Services, Water and Soil Division,

Ministry of tiorks and Development

This publ ication presents an empîricar method for estimating a

design flood peak discharge in an ungauged New Zealand catchmenf.
It is emphasised that this is not a new revision of the method,
wh ich is stil I in its 3rd revised (1964) form, metric version, with only
minor modifications.

First circulated September 1gj3

Rev ised and re- îssued as Pub I i c works Departrnent rechn i ca I

Memorandum No. 61 July 1955

Revised method September l95g

Second rev i s ion August 1 961

Th ird revision June 1964

Metric verslon October 1975

This repr înt February 1980

Nationâl Librðry of tJeï ze¿Iånd

càtâlogurrg-in-!ùbticaèron dã rà

9e:
Technical servrces,tsðter and Sort Divrsron,
Mìnistry o€ îo¡ks and Develofent. - UellrngÈon :
Water and Soil Drvision MinisÈry of Works ând
Develofen! for N¿rional w¿rer and soiì Con_
servation organìsarron, 1980. - lv.
First pùlished for internaì use onìy
Wellington : ðinistry of Works, 1955; reprinr
wiLh ninor ¡evision of netric version,
pùlished Welìington : Wðter and Sorl conser-
vation organisation, 19?5.
55I -49AO2L2
l. Runoff- TSIes, caÌcutations,erc. I. Nàrlonat
WaÈer and Soil Conservation Orqânisation.
Il. Title. 1It. TirIe; Merric version of
lechnicðl nercrandú no. 61. IV. series.

Publ ished for the National Water and Soi I Conservation Organisation
by the water and soil Division, Mínistry of works and Development,
P.0. Box 1 2-041, We I I i ngton, New Zea I and.
 pag€ 1

1
1

ly 5

5
5
6
6
6

11

12

14

16

PagB 2

?,8

I
 -1-

1. INTRODUCTION

Technical Memorandum No.61 (TM6l) is an empirical method for estimal-

ing a design flood peak discharge in an ungauged New Zealand catchment.
This publicalion presents a reprint of the melric version of TM61
(October 197Ð. lt is emphasised that this is nol a new revision of the
method; the method is presented ln its 3rd revision form (1964) with only
minor modif ications. Furlher clarification of varlous points and
reference to more recent rainfal I records are included.

2. FORMULA

The TM61 formula is:

3t
Qp= o.o13e c R s A/q (1)

uhere Qp = estimate of fhe desîgn peak discharge, in m3/s

C= a coefficient which depends on the physiography of the
catchment
ñ-
ñ a rainfal I factor which depends on the design storm
c- a catchment shape factor
anÅ. A = catchment area, in km2.

The derivation of C, R and S is described in sections 3, 4 and 5,

respectively.

3. THE COEFFICIENT C

3.1 General Procedure

The coefficient C for the catchment is derived by the following
procedure:

(a) Select from Table 1 a value for W¡a representalive of The catchment.
(b) Determine a value for W5 from Figure 1.
(c) Obtain W, which is the product of the W¡ç and W5 values.
(d) Convert W to a value for C using Flgure 2.
3.2 lrJrC

The t¡'/¡ç factor îs intended to account for the effects of inf iltration
and ground surface and cover characteristics on runoff. The selection
of a value from Table 1 for the factor must take into consideration the
moisture condition of the catchment for the deslgn storm. As the return
period of the design storm is increased the catchment is more likely to
be saturaled, and a hlgher W¡g value should be chosen accordingly.
NOTE: Care should be taken when using WIC values of 0.4 and 0.5 for !
pumice soi l. Pumlce can be very absorbent when wet. However,
high runoff from pumice catchments has been observed after dry
conditions and also when the catchment is saturated. Careful
judgement based on local knowledge should be made when choosing
a value for W¡g for these catchments.
 -2-
TABLE 1

VALUES FOR hJIC

Soils Ground Surface-Cover wtc

high density t.B

deve I opment
Urban Catchments
moderafe lo low
lrnpervious soi ls (such density development
1.5
as clay soi ls wîth poor
strucfure e.g. norfhern Mainly bare surfaces \.2
yel low brown earThs).
Average shortgrazed catchmenls 1.1
Any soi l, if safurafed,
is included ín this 30% in
o1 area long grass, scrub or bush 1.0
g roup.
60% of area in long grass, scrub or bush ^o
100% of area in long grass, scrub or bush 0.8

h i ghdensi ty 1.7
deve I opment
Urban Catchments
moderate to low
1.3
l'.ioderate I y absorbenT densily development
soi ls (such as medium
textured soils with Mainly bare surfaces 1.1
good structure e.g.
southern ye I I ow brown Average shortg razed catchments 1.0
earths ) .
30f" o1 areain long grass, scrub or bush 0.9

60l ol area in long grass, scrub or bush 0.8

IOO% of area in long grass, scrub or bush 0.1

high densitY 1.5

deve I opment
Urban Cafchmenls
moderate to low
1.2
dens i ty -deve I oPment
Absorbent soi I (such as Mainly bare surfaces 1.0
deep yel low brown sands
and pumice soi ls). Average shortgrazed calchmenls no

30% of area i n long grass, scrub or bush 0.8

60% oÍ area in long grass, scrub or bush 0.7

100% of area in long grass, scrub or bush 0.6

l4a in ly bare surf aces

Average shortgrazed catchments 0.5
Verv absorbent pumice 30% of area in long grass, scrub or bush
soi l.
60l, oÍ area i n long grass' scrub or bush 0.4
100Í of area in leng grass, scrub or bush
 ó
5

5 3 xl}z
4
2
,lO¡ 3

2
>.
l3
an
LU
q. q,
t-
t! o
¡-
ãr U
o I

= 5* c^J

= 4ru
I
o_
IF- o
9s
z 3 ,l0l
J
t4
tu
J4

J2
2
z
xl0o"
IN
UZ

7l
_a
I 2345 34
xlO' X IOO x lol
ÁVERAGE CHANNE| ST.OPE %

FIG.1 SLOPE FACTOR ESTIIVlATION

 2 .J

}- 5
x
f
ll
4
I

Þ
I
ì

23 456 I 3
xlo2 x lo3

D'SCHARGE COEFF'C'ENT C

FIG2 C()NVERSION CHART W-C

 -5-

3.3 Wg

WS is a slope factor, and its determination requires data on the

horizontal lenglh and slope of the main channel extended up to the calch-
ment boundary. Methods of calculating the average channel slope are
given in Appendix A.
To determine W5, define the point on Figure 1 corresponding to the
channel length in kilomelres and the average channel slope in percent.
From this point draw a line parallel to the topography lines to intersect
the slope factor I ine. W5 is then the right-hand ordînate thal corresponds
to the interseclion point on the slope factor line.
Whenthere are insufficient data to calculate the average channel
slope, W5 still be determined by assessing the topography of the
can
catchment. W5 corresponds to the point on the slope factor line that
represents the average catchment topography. Because of the subjeclivity
in this approach, it is advisable to make a slighf ly conservative estimate
of the topographica I characteristics.

4. THE RAINFALL FACTOR R

4.1 General

I factor R is given by
The rainfal

R = des ign ra i nfa I I depth (2)

standard rainfal I depth
The design rainfal I deplh depends on:
(a) the return period of the design storm; and

(b) the duration of the design storm.

Both these points are elaborated upon be I ow.

4.2 Return Period

It is assumed that lhe design storm has a return period the same as
lhat of the design flood. For practical purposes this assumption is the
most reasonable one lo make.
The choice of return period must take inlo account several factors,
which include: the expected I ife of the structure lnvôlved; the general
economic consequences of the failure of the structure; and the loss of
life and llvelihood that might result. lnformation on fhe return period
is available in many hydrological texts, including the itOode of Practice
for the Deslgn of Bridge Walerwaysrr (Civil DÌvision, MWD, 197ü. Many
bridges are designed for the 50, 100 or 200-year peak discharge. Small
culverts are often designed for the 10 or Z}-year peak discharge and a
check made that larger floods can be passed by heading up.

¡.--
Í-

-6-

4.3 Duration

lf the rainfall in an impervious catchment is temporally and spalially

uniform, the peak of fhe outflow hydrograph is nof attained until the whole
of the catchment is contributing to the flow at the outlet. Therefore, the
duration of the design storm for a catchment ls usually taken as being equal
to the time for watei to travel from lhe farthest point on the catchmenf to
the outlet. This travel time is known as the time of concentration. The
recommended measure of the time of concentration îs lhe fairly constant min-
imum value for the time of rise of the flood hydrograph that results from
short duration rainfal I excess.
For an ungauged catchment the formulae and nomogram in Appendix B
may be used to estimate the tlme of concentration. The estimates from
these sources wi I I vary because: different interprelalions of the lime
of concentration are involved; not al I the sources are suited to Íhe same
condifions; and the sources do not accounl for the tendency of the lime of
concentration to decrease wilh increasing rainfal I intensily.
The chosen value for the fime of concentration should be fhe one
considered the mosl reasonable for the catchmenl and for the design storm.
It shou ld not be arrived at by simply averaging the results f rom the formulae
and nomogram in Appendîx B. A useful check on the chosen value is to
convert it to an average f low velocity (using the maximum f low length) and
then compare this velocity value with those pertaining to nearby, gauged
catchments of s im í I ar s i ze and lopography.
The rainfall faclor R may somelimes prove insensitive to differenf storm
durations. ln these cases it will not be necessary to estimate the time of
concentrat î on .

4.4 Design Rai nfal 1 Depth

Robertson (1963) has presented rainfal I deplh-duration-frequency data

in map form for the whole of New Zealand and in detailed tabular form for
46 pluviometer stations. Simi lar, up-to-date data are avai lable from the
Meteorological Off ice for individual pluviometer stalions. From The data
the rainfal I depth, corresponding to the selected duration and refurn
period of the design storm, can be calculated by the method described by
Robertson ( 1963).
It is preferable to use the more precise pluviometer data when calcu-
lating the rainfal I depth. The importance of the structure involved may
necessitate the processing of data for a pluviometer not covered by Robertson
(1963) into dept'h-Ouratloñ-frequency form. lf no pluviometer Îs located
within reasonable distance of fhe catchment it will be necessary to use the
data given in map form.
NQTE: Data are available in map and tabular form from the Water and Soil
Division, MVID (Tomlinson, 19BO) and lhe Meteorological Service
( Cou l ler and l l , 1980) .
lHesse
4.5 Standard Rainfaì1 Depth

The value onthe standard curve in Figures 3a, 5b corresponding to

the design slorm duration is the standard iainfall depth. The standard
curve is proportlonal to the rainfal I deplh-duration relationships existing
at Kelburn, but has been set that 76 mm corresponds to the l-hour duratlon'
so
-E
s
I
F-
o-
l!
o
J
J
fz
a
É.

20 30 40 50 60 80

DURATIONS IO TO I20 MINUTES

Ff G 3A. STANDARD DEPTH DURATION DIAGRAM

-
 B

500

475

450

425

400

375

350

325

300

Ë 275
5
I ?50
F
o_
l¡J 2?5
o "$7
J
J 200
t!
z
t75
É.

r50

t25

too

75

50

25

2 ro t2 t4 16 18 20 ?? 24

DURATIONS 2 TO 24 HOURS

FIG.38. STANDARD DEPTH _ DURATION DIAGRAM,

 -9-

5. THE SHAPE FACTOR S

The effect of catchment shape on the peak discharge is al lowed for by

the shape factor S, which is determined from Figure 4. The absci ssa va I ue,
the d imens ion I ess number K, i s ca I cu I ated from

K= Ld
A (3)
-
where A is the catchment area in square kilometres and L¿ is the direet
length in kilometres from the farthest point on the catchment to the out-
let. The S value is the ordinate on the curve in Flgure 4 lhal corres-
ponds to the K value.

2'0

t.5
q
o
t-
U
fl ii iiii,
H r.o
I

--.;
l
ill
rji:
{s
rl
ll
V,
:!

,i

,1
0'5 tl
I

I
I

0.5 2.0 2.5

K=lÊo
FIG.4 SHAPE FACTI]R

6. APPLICATION

The appl ication of TM61 requires reasonable spatial uniformily in the

physiography and lhe rainfal I characteristics of the calchment concerned.
Thus, while lhe method is general ly applicable to smal I catchmenfs there are
I imitations on its use for large catchments. The recommended uPpef-l imit"on
the size of the catchment to which lhe method should be applied is 1000 kmz.
The maps presented by Robertson (196Ð are based on rainfall intensities
recorded al elevations less than 600 m. The maps should therefore not be
used for catchments above this elevation. Furthermore, according to Robertson
(196, the rainfall Values taken f rom the maps will be least reliable where lhe
 -10-

orograph¡c influence on rainfal I ls greatest. Hence the maps should be

used cautlously for the catchments in Taranakl and the Wesl Coast of lhe
South I s land.
N0TE: The division of a catchmenl into sub-catchments for the purpose
of dlscharge eslimation may be warranted, but only when obvious
physiographical boundaries exist wlthln the calchment. Because
ralnfal I decreases in intensity with increasing calchment area for
a given return period, the whole calchment area should be used in
determining the design ralnfal I depth for the sub-calchment. lf
this is not done and the design depths are based Ìnslead on the
corresponding sub-catchment areas, then when lhe compuled floods
for the sub-catchments are routed to fhe catchment outlet the
resulting return period of the flood will be greater lhan that of
its componenls.

The combining of the computed floods for the sub-catchments and

their transference down stream may require the use of a channel
routing technlque or some other account being taken of channel
rout i ng effects.

Finally, the chosen values for cerlain TM6l parameters such as W5

and l,l¡ç have an important bearing on the design discharge estimate. lt is
therefóre recomrnended that informalion on lhese parameter values for the
region concerned should be sought from the appropriate local agencies,
e.g. catchment and regional water boards, and district water and soil
offices of the Ministry of Works and Developmenl. These agencies may also
be able to assist wiTh expected values for times of concentration (or
average flow velocities) and with rainfal I data.
N0TE: The accuracy of TM61 may be gauged from recent reports wrltten by
Waugh (1972) and 0gle (1978).

NOTE: There is some evidence (Waugh 1972) that TM61 may under-estimate
design peak discharges for smal I catchments in the Northland and
Auckland reglons. lt is suggested that-for catchments in these
regions with areas between 2.5 and 25 knz the TM6'l formula could
be amended to
Qp - 0.0109 CRSA

where the symbols and their derivation are as for TM61.

An example of the use of TM6l is given in Appendix C.

 -11 -

REFERENCES

Civil Division, MtrlD, 19762 Code of ptaetice for the deeign of bridge
uateruays. Water and Soil Division for fhe Civil Division, MV{D,
C iv I I Dl v is ion Pub I icat ion CDP 705/8. 57p.

Coulter, J.D. ; Hesse'll, J.W.D. 1980: High intensity rainfaLl in Neu

ZeaLolã.. Part ll. New Zealand Meteorological Service, Miscellaneous
Pub I ication No. 162.
Qgle, D.G. 1978: SuitabiLitU of TechníeaL Memorøndtnn No. 6l fon flood
pre&iction
-chr
in the Christclwrch Works Distriet. Unpub I ished Reporl,
istchurch D istr icl, M ín istry of works and Deve lopment.
Robertson, N.G., 1963: The frequeney of high íntensity nainfaLLs in Net't
ZeaLøtd. New Zea land Meteorological Servlce, Miscel laneous
Publicatlon No. 118;

Tay'lor, A.B.; Schwarz, H.E ., 1952: Unit hyfuograph Lag and.peak fLou
reLated to basín ehayaeteristies. Transactions of American
Geophysical Union, Vol . 33, No. 2, pp.235-246.

Technical Memorandum No. 61, 3rd Revision, 1964: ProuieiortaL standard

fon empirieaL estimation of fLood discharges. water and soi I

Divislon, Ministry of Works and Developmenl.

Tomlinson, A.I. 1980: High íntensitg nainfaLL ín Nøa ZeaLattd. Part l.

water and soil Division, Ministry of works and Development.
Water and So i I Techn i ca I Pub I i cat ion '19 .

Waugh, J.R. lg72z Repoyt on the use of Te,e.h'nieal Memonanáum

No' 6L
(Sxd Rett.)-foz,-esiimating fLood peak, &Lschange for sna,LL r.uraL
-water
catc\ments in the Noz,thLmd-auekLaná anea. and soil Division,
Ministry of Works and Development, 10p'

J.K.G.; Kopittke,
hlard,'rainfaLL R.; POrter, N.; t^latson,8., 1977t AustnaLian
FLood arnLysis and desígn The lnstitution
"iâ'r"*ff:
of Engîneers, Austral ia. 159 + vi P'
 -12-
AFIPENDI X A

CALCUI.ATION OF THE AVERAGE CHANNEL SLOPE

An example of the calculation of the average channel slope uslng the

rrEqual Areafrmethod is given below. This method is slmple, and has in
praclice been found to give results largely lndependenf of the user.

EQUAL-AREA METHOD

Assume a longitudinal profi le as shown below.

(n
l¡J
É.
t--
t¡J

z
z.
o
E
Lu
J
UJ

CHANNEL LENGTH IN KILOMETRES

The method involves the calculation of fhe slope of the hypothetical

line AC, which is so positioned that the enclosed areas above and below it,
i.e. areas X and Y, are equal. The procedure is lo planimeter the fotal
area under the longitudinal prof ile. This area, Ad, equals the area of the
tri ang le ABC. Thus

A¿=TABxBC

=jLxh
1

2A¿
h=T
Hence the average slope Su is given by

^h2A¿
)a=f=V
When the units for elevation and length in the diagram above are used

su = Töffi n/.n
 -13-

Several other methods of calculatlng lhe average channel slope are

avai lable, such as the Taylor-Schwarz, Modifled Taylor-Schwarz, and the
method descrlbed inrrAustralian Rainfall and Runoff 1977n which is another
modification of the original Taylor-Schwarz.
These have, however, proved inconsistent in recent practlce, wlth the
two Taylor-Schwarz methods giving low values for steep slopes and the
Austral ian varlation giving high values on al I slopes.
The melhods are listed below:
(a) Taylor-Schwarz (1952)

uhere n is the number of reaches of equal channel length that lhe

channel is divided into.
(b) Modified Taylor-Schwarz

uhere l¡ is the length of a reach of the main channel and

s¡ is the.slope of the corresponding reach. The reaches are
chosen so that wilhin each the slope is fairly uniform. The
method is improved by choosing equal elevations.

(c) Method described in Ward et at. (1977), p 82,

sa=
[+-,],
using equal elevations.
 -t4-
APPENDIX B

TIME OF CONCENTRATION FORMULAE

1. RAIVISER-KIRP ICH

Tc = 0. O 195 L0 ' 77 5u-0. 385

where Tc= time of concentration, in minutes

c-
Ja- average channel slope, in n/n
L- flow length from The farthesl point on the catchment to the out I et,
in m.

2. BRANSBY -I^I I LL IAMS

whe re Tc= fime of concentration, în hours

L- maximum flow length, in km
f= catchmenl area, in km2
N= the difference in elevation between the highesl and I owest poi nts
on the main channel, in m.

3. U.S. SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE

Trc _
- \-I-i
'o.87L3'0.385

where rc- time of concentration, in hours

T

L_ maximum flow length, in km

H- the difference in elevation between the highest and lowest poinls
on the main channel, in m.
9.
I
f
6. FoR¡uLA i. ?.t?r ( -fffi )"'
5.
@, t . lrtE OF Ct\lCENrRAllON lX HO|?S
ñ . AVERÂGE \ LL€ OF YANNII'¿G'S 'n'
L . CHiìNl,rtL LfNGTH AS s¡rOV¡¡ON TOPO M.Ae il Xtr
c . RUNtrF CO€FFlClENr lN RAllO.tÂL foRr¡lLÀ
r . DESIGT'¡ R€IURN PER¡@ IHOTN RÁINFALLDEPI}IIN
S . A!€RAGE SLOPÉ ()F CHA.{ÈEL ¡N ñ/M
R . AVERAGE HYOFAULIC RADIUS Of CHANilEL lN n
EXAfin-E: n . OO¡l
L.&O
C.Oa
¡.65
- S . Oolal
R..O5
l¡) ñrL.o.5?.A
(i¡l C¡¡ . ¿6.8
(¡¡i) JoN a 6 B rraRK TNIERSÊCT|O|I¡ orr Y' aS X
(lv) JON x ON Y wlTH OOl4! Ol{ S TO GlvE Z Oftl Yt
(y) JolN 0.5 0N R WITH ¿ TO GIVE I .l'f,9 hr¡

ts
2
U
NOTE THIS TIME PROVIDES O''¡LY FOR CHÁNT'¡EL FLOII
u ANO ALLOWAi{C€ SHOIJLo æ MAoE FOR lNfTlÂL
E OVERLANO FLOW TO OO THIS REFERENCE S¡JOU¡
B
I
I
BE MADE IO TH€ CTiART FOfi O'ERLA¡{D FLOV
GIVEN BELOW.
7'O
u E
o
2 o
0.0 l
E u
Â
9.O ô o
1 2 J
Þ
I
z
u E
o a I
J Þ f
o ô e CHART FOR OVERLAND FLOW
I L
G
r
c
)J I
É ø
tD f= c
2 = c
7
&
E
ô r
I o r
ts U
=
b u
Þ I Ë
ê F
Þ o E
u E
fJ E
c F
2
d
G,
U
g
À 5 6
I
6 ä
U
f I
F

CHART TO DETERMINE THE TIME OF

CONCENTRATION OF A CATCI"f\ENT P.\il0. r59529
 -16-

APPENDIX C

EXAMPLE OF THE USE OF TM61

Assume a hypothetical catchment with a main channel longitudinal prof ile

as shown in seclion 2 in Appendix A, and with
Area, A=33.62knz
Lengfh of main channel, L = 8.357 kn
Direct length, Ld = 6.20 km
Average main channel slope = 0.0143 n/n
Design sform return period = 20 Years.

1. C VALUE

(a) For saturated condifions, Table 1 gives WIC = 1.0.

(b) For L = 8.357 km and Su = 1.43fr, Figure 1 gives WS = 47.
(c) W = WtC x lVS = 1.0 x 47 = 47.
(d) For W = 47, Figure 2 gives C = 910.

2. RAINFALL DEPTH-DURATION DATA

(a) From the rainfal{ intensifies recorded at a nearby pluviometer, fhe

fol lowing depth-duration data are obtained for the 2O-year return period:

Durati on 10 mtn 20 min 30 min t hr 2hr 6 hr

Depth, mm 20 35 49 65 76 104

(b) Examine whether R is insensifive to different design storm àurations.

Design Rainfal I Standard Rainfall Rainfall Factor

Duration Depth, mm Depth, mm R

30 min 49 61 0.80
t hr 65 76 0.85
2hr 76 103 0.14
6 hr 104 193 0.54

The variation in R warranfs an estimation of the time of concentration'

3. TIME OF CONCENTRATION

(a) Ramser-Kirpich
Tc = 0.0195 x 83570'77 x g.9143-0.38s
= 105 min (1.75 hrs)
8357
.'. Ave rage f low ve I oc i tY , 7 = ffio -- 1.33 n/s.
 -L7 -
( b) Bransby-t^li I I iams

0.953 x 8.357r'2
lC -
33.620 .I y 293.40 .2
= 2.96 hrs

7= ffi= o'78 m/s'

"'
(c) U.S. Soil Conservation Service
r -'10.38s
_ 10.87 x 8. j573
r,c-lT) |

= 1.42 hrs

v= ffi= 1'64n/s'
"'
(d) Pl,lD 159529

As shown in the êxample with the nomogram,

Tc = 1.39 hrs (channel f low) + O.2g hrs (overland f low)

= 1.67 hrs
8357
.'.V= j-æõ1ù- = 1.39 m/s,
(e) A time of concenlration of 1.40 hrs appears reasonable for the catchment
and the deslgn storm - accept this figure.

4. R VALUE

From the depth-duration data of the nearby pluviometer, a rainfall depth

of 71 mm is oblained for lhe design storm of 1'.4 hrs duration and 2}-year
return period.
It Ìs assumed lhat this rainfall depth is the sanìe as fhat which would
occur at a central poinf ln the catchmeni. Because o.f the posslble error in
this assumption in lhis instance, the point raînfal I value oÍ 71 mm is not
reduced according to Figure 6 in Roberison (196]) before it is taken as being
a representative value for the whole cafchrnent area.

ThusR=#=o.Br.

5. S VALUE
(a) K=#=0.87.
(b) For K = 0.87, Figure 4 gives S = ,l.25.
 -18-
6. DESIGN DISCHARGE ESTIMATE

QP=0.0159Cp5¡3/+
= 0.0139 x 910 x 0.81 x 1.25 x 33,623/+

= 178.8 m3ls.
l_