Generalized Numerical Solution for Detention Basin Design

S. David Graber, P.E., F.ASCE1

Abstract: A particularly useful generalized numerical solution for detention basin design is presented and sets the stage for practical
applications for roof detention and the rationale and use of such a solution for detention basin design more generally. The generalized
numerical solution provides results that can be applied to practical problems in certain cases and demonstrates the general importance of
storm duration. The method utilizes a trapezoidal inflow hydrograph, which includes the important effect of storm duration based on the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 03/03/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

modified rational method. Convenient charts are presented to display the relationship between the variables. The derivation provides the
basis for specializing the method to provide generalized curves applicable to storage detention on roofs. Although the results presented
herein are more generalized than those presented by other writers, certain other methods are shown to compare favorably for special cases.
An added perspective is provided on some of those other methods. Soil Conservation Service TR-55 curves are included in the compari-
sons, which demonstrates their limitations. An example demonstrates application of the generalized curves.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲IR.1943-4774.0000010
CE Database subject headings: Detention basins; Detention reservoirs; Dimensional analysis; Peak flow; Stormwater management;
Surface drainage.

Introduction S = NHᐉ 共2兲

A generalized numerical solution for detention basin design al-
lows for the preliminary design of such basins in some cases and
final design in certain other situations. The purpose of the present
paper is to provide a particularly useful generalized solution, re-
late it to certain other solutions, and set the stage for practical
applications for roof detention 共Graber 2009兲 and discussion of
the rationale and use of such a solution for detention basin design
more generally in a future publication.
The generalized solution is based on four basic relationships,
the first being the conservation of mass relationship for a deten-
tion basin given by
Q = MHm 共3兲
in which H = elevation measured upward from the elevation at
which effective storage and outflow begin, and N, M, ᐉ, and m
= coefficients and exponents defined by Eqs. 共2兲 and 共3兲. These
equations will be applicable in certain cases, as partly discussed
by Graber 共2009兲 and to be more fully discussed in a future pub-
lication.
Generalized Numerical Solution

The generalized numerical solution derived herein will provide

dS
=I−Q 共1兲 results that can be applied to practical problems in certain cases
dt and demonstrate the general importance of storm duration. The
method presented in this section was developed by the writer in
in which I = volumetric inflow rate; Q = volumetric outflow rate; 1981 and has been used for applications by the writer and others
and dS / dt = time rate of increase of effective storage volume. The to whom the writer has provided this method.
second is the inflow relationship, which is assumed to have the From Eqs. 共2兲 and 共3兲, the storage is related to the outflow by
form of the trapezoidal hydrograph depicted in Fig. 1, with peak
inflow I p, linear rising limb to the time of concentration tc, dura- S = N共Q/M兲ᐉ/m 共4兲
tion tr, and the linear receding limb of duration Rtc. Additional from which
characteristics of the inflow hydrograph and discussion of the
modified rational method to which it corresponds are given by N
dS = d共Qᐉ/m兲 共5兲
Chien and Saigal 共1974兲 and Graber 共2009兲. M ᐉ/m
The third and fourth relationships are simplified forms of the
which can be substituted into Eq. 共1兲 to give
storage and outflow terms in Eq. 共1兲, expressed, respectively, as
follows: N d共Qᐉ/m兲
= I共t兲 − 共Qᐉ/m兲1/共ᐉ/m兲 共6兲
M ᐉ/m dt
1
Consulting Engineer, 118 Larson Rd., Stoughton, MA 02072. E-mail:
sdavidgraber@cs.com in which I共t兲 denotes that the inflow is a known function of time.
Note. This manuscript was submitted on October 9, 2007; approved Eq. 共6兲 can be nondimensionalized with respect to the peak
on November 3, 2008; published online on January 27, 2009. Discussion inflow I p and time of peak inflow tc, and can be rewritten as
follows:

再 冋冉 冊 册 冎
period open until January 1, 2010; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Irrigation and
Drainage Engineering, Vol. 135, No. 4, August 1, 2009. ©ASCE, ISSN d共Q/I p兲ᐉ/m I共t兲 Q ᐉ/m 1/共ᐉ/m兲
=B − 共7a兲
0733-9437/2009/4-487–492/$25.00. d共t/tc兲 Ip Ip

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2009 / 487

J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2009.135:487-492.

 The trapezoidal inflow hydrograph shown in Fig. 1 is
piecewise continuous, having one continuous relationship appli-
cable for t 艋 tc, another applying for tc ⬍ t 艋 tr, and another for
tr ⬍ t 艋 共tr + Rtc兲. Specifically

冦
t/tc , t 艋 tc 共15a兲
I 1, tc ⬍ t 艋 tr 共15b兲

冉 冊
=
Ip 1 t tr
1− − , tr ⬍ t 艋 共tr + Rtc兲 共15c兲
R tc tc
The functional relationships of Eqs. 共11兲 and 共14兲 can also be
extended to a piecewise continuous inflow hydrograph, focusing
Fig. 1. Inflow and outflow hydrograph characteristics specifically on the trapezoidal hydrograph as will be demon-
strated next.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 03/03/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

For a given R, Eq. 共7兲 implies the following relationship for a

I ptcM ᐉ/m trapezoidal hydrograph when t 艋 tc
B= 共7b兲
NIᐉ/m
p

The dependent variable will be retained in the form 共Q / I p兲ᐉ/m−1

Q共t兲
Ip
t ᐉ
= ␾ , ,B ,
tc m
冉 冊 t 艋 tc 共16兲
rather than express the differential equation in terms of
d共Q / I p兲 / d共t / tc兲. The latter form requires division by 共Q / I p兲ᐉ/m−1, For t = tc

冉 冊
which is inadmissible when Q / I p = 共Q / I p兲ᐉ/m−1 = 0, an important
Q共tc兲 ᐉ
initial condition. = ␾ ,B , t = tc 共17兲
One wants to solve for the maximum outflow, which occurs Ip m
when dQ / dt = d共Qᐉ/m兲 / dt = 0 and 关from Eq. 共1兲兴 I = Q 共see Fig. 1兲. For tc ⬍ t 艋 tr, since Q = Q共tc兲 at t = tc
Denoting the magnitude of the maximum outflow and the time at
which it occurs by Qⴱ and tⴱ, respectively, one obtains
ⴱ
I共t 兲 = Q ⴱ
共8兲
Q共t兲
Ip
t Q共tc兲 ᐉ
=␾ ,
tc I p m
冉
, ,B , 冊 tc ⬍ t 艋 tr 共18兲

For a given, mathematically continuous inflow hydrograph The term Q共tc兲 can be eliminated between the above two func-
with Q = 0 at t = 0 as the initial condition, Eq. 共7兲 implies the tional relationships, giving

冉 冊
following functional relationship:
t ᐉ
冉 冊
Q共t兲
Qⴱ tⴱ ᐉ = ␾ , ,B , tc ⬍ t 艋 tr 共19兲
= ␾ ,B, 共9兲 Ip tc m
Ip tc m
For t = tr
From Eq. 共8兲
Qⴱ I共tⴱ兲
Ip
=
Ip
=␺
tⴱ
tc
冉冊 共10兲
Q共tr兲
Ip
tr ᐉ
tc m
冉
= ␾ , ,B , 冊 t = tr 共20兲

For tr ⬍ t 艋 共tr + Rtc兲, since Q = Q共tr兲 at t = tr

The term tⴱ / tc can theoretically be eliminated from Eqs. 共9兲 and
共10兲 to give the following functional relationship: Q共t兲
冉
t Q共tr兲 ᐉ
冊
冉 冊
=␾ , , ,B , tr ⬍ t 艋 共tr + Rtc兲 共21兲
Qⴱ ᐉ Ip tc I p m
= ␾ B, 共11兲
Ip m The term Q共tr兲 can be eliminated between the above two func-
Denoting the maximum required storage volume by V, one ob- tional relationships, giving

冉 冊
tains from Eq. 共4兲
Q共t兲 t tr ᐉ
V = N共Qⴱ/M兲ᐉ/m 共12兲 = ␸ , , ,B , tr ⬍ t 艋 共tr + Rtc兲 共22兲
Ip tc tc m
From Eqs. 共12兲 and 共7b兲 Noting that tⴱ must fall within the range of tr ⬍ tⴱ 艋 共tr + Rtc兲,

B= 冉 冊
Q ⴱ ᐉ/m
I pt c
共13兲
Eq. 共22兲 gives
Ip V
The functional relationship of Eq. 共11兲 can thus be expressed, for
Qⴱ
Ip
冉
tⴱ tr ᐉ
= ␾ , , ,B
tc tc m
冊 共23兲
a given shape of inflow hydrograph, in the following convenient
form: in which tⴱ / tc is unknown. However, from Eqs. 共15a兲–共15c兲, the
relationship analogous to Eq. 共10兲 can be given as
V
I pt c
=␺ 冉 冊
Qⴱ ᐉ
,
Ip m
共14兲 Qⴱ
=1−
1 tⴱ tr
− 冉 冊 共24兲
Ip R tc tc
The relationship between the three variables, as implied by the
above functional equation 关or Eq. 共11兲兴, can easily be presented The term tⴱ / tc can be eliminated between Eqs. 共23兲 and 共24兲 to
graphically, giving a convenient generalized solution. give the following functional relationship:

488 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2009

J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2009.135:487-492.

 Qⴱ
Ip
ᐉ tr
= ⌽ B, , ,R
m tc
冉 冊 共25兲

Noting that tr / tc and R simply characterize the inflow hydrograph,

it can be seen that Eq. 共25兲 is essentially the same functionally as
Eq. 共11兲.
Eqs. 共12兲 and 共13兲 still apply and allow Eq. 共25兲 to be ex-
pressed in the form analogous to Eq. 共14兲

V
I pt c
=␺ 冉
Qⴱ ᐉ tr
, , ,R
I p m tc
冊 共26兲

The inflow volume Vi resulting from the trapezoidal hydrograph

is given by
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 03/03/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

V i = I pt c 冉 R + 1 tr
2
+ −1
tc
冊 共27兲

From Eqs. 共26兲 and 共27兲 one may then obtain

V
␺ 冉
Qⴱ ᐉ tr
, , ,R
I p m tc
冊
冉 冊
= 共28兲
Vi R + 1 tr
+ −1
2 tc
An advantage of Eq. 共28兲 is that the variables V / Vi and Qⴱ / I p
both lie within the range from 0 to 1, facilitating a convenient plot
of the results. No new variables have been introduced in going
from Eqs. 共26兲–共28兲 and the functional relationship V / Vi can be
expressed as follows:

V
Vi
= ␺⬘ 冉
Qⴱ ᐉ tr
, , ,R
I p m tc
冊 共29兲

Generalized solutions in the form of Eq. 共29兲 for the trape-

zoidal inflow hydrograph give curves of the type shown on
Figs. 2共a–d兲 for four particular values of ᐉ / m 关the value of R
= 1.67 共McCuen 1982; SCS 1986; USBR 1965兲 is employed here
for the slight conservatism it provides兴. These solutions were ob-
tained using a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method 共Hildebrand
1962兲 over most of the range. For Qⴱ / I p very close to 1 the
numerical solution becomes difficult; in that situation, Eqs. 共13兲
and 共27兲 can be combined to give

V 1/B

冉 冊
⬇ , Qⴱ/I p ⬇ 1 共30兲
Vi R + 1 tr
+ −1
2 tc
The value of V / Vi is then calculated using Eq. 共30兲 to complete
the curve for Qⴱ / I p ⬇ 1.
Fig. 3 gives similar curves for a fixed tr / tc = 1 and the same
four values of ᐉ / m, as in Figs. 2共a–d兲. This plot demonstrates that
a larger ᐉ / m gives a smaller V / Vi for a given tr / tc and Qⴱ / I p, as
has also been noted by others for other inflow hydrographs 关e.g.,
McEnroe 共1992兲兴.
Plots can also be presented in the form of Eq. 共25兲. For
rectangular inflow hydrographs 共tr / tc → ⬁ or tc = 0兲, applicable
especially to roof drainage, the curves for all ᐉ / m values can
be presented on a single such chart for the forms analogous to
Eqs. 共25兲 and 共29兲, as given in Graber 共2009兲. Also for rectangu- Fig. 2. 共a兲 V / Vi versus Qⴱ / I p for ᐉ / m = 0.2; 共b兲 V / Vi versus Qⴱ / I p for
lar inflow hydrographs, analytical solutions can be obtained for ᐉ / m = 1.0; 共c兲 V / Vi versus Qⴱ / I p for ᐉ / m = 2.0; and 共d兲 V / Vi versus
certain cases 共Graber 2009 and references cited therein兲. Analyti- Qⴱ / I p for ᐉ / m = 3.0
cal solutions by Basha 共1994, 1995兲 are discussed next.

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2009 / 489

J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2009.135:487-492.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 03/03/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 3. V / Vi versus Qⴱ / I p for tr / tc = 1
Relation to Other Methods
Certain other methods can be compared directly to the general-
ized solution presented above. The Urban Land Institute 共ULI兲
method 共Tourbier and Westmacott 1981兲 assumed a trapezoidal
inflow hydrograph and an outflow hydrograph that rises linearly
with time. This method permits a good qualitative understanding
of the influence of rainfall duration on basin volume require-
ments. However, its assumption of a linear outflow hydrograph
also excludes the important effects of the type of outlet and the
basin shape. The ULI method implies the relationship V / Vi = 1
− Qⴱ / I p. Plotted in Fig. 2共b兲, this relationship can be seen to
closely match the writer’s result for ᐉ / m = 1 with tr / tc = 1. Thus
the ULI method may provide a reasonable approximation for,
e.g., a proportional 共Suttro兲 weir outlet and vertical side walls.
However, for other practical 共and preferable兲 outlet controls and
basin shapes, the ULI method predicts storage volumes, which
can be significantly larger or smaller than would properly be pro-
vided. Depending on the type of outflow control and basin geom-
etry, the ULI-predicted storage can easily differ by 100% from the
accurate values predicted by the generalized method given above
for the same inflow hydrograph and Qⴱ / I p.
Added to Figs. 2共a–d兲 are the curves taken from Fig. 6-1 of
TR-55 共SCS 1986兲, calculated using the formulas in TR-55’s Ap-
pendix F 共i.e., using the formula therein for Fig. 6-1 and coeffi-
cients in Table F-2兲. TR-55’s Chapter 6 characterizes the curves
as follows: “The method 关used in developing the SCS curves兴 is
based on average storage and routing effects for many structures
关using the method found in TR-55 Chapter 5兴. The relation-
ships . . . were determined on the basis of single stage outflow
devices. Some were controlled by pipe flow, others by weir flow.
Verification runs were made using multiple-stage outflow devices,
and the variance was similar to that used for both single- and
multiple-stage outflow devices . . . . It is . . . adequate . . . for final
design of small detention basins . . . . Figure 6-1 is biased to pre-
vent undersizing of outflow devices, but it may significantly over-
490 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2009
J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2009.135:487-492.
estimate the required storage capacity.” For a given ratio of peak
outflow to peak inflow, the required ratio of storage volume to
runoff volume is, over most of the range of variables, substan-
tially higher than predicted by TR-55. Conversely, over most of
the range, for a given ratio of storage volume to runoff volume
the ratio of peak outflow to peak inflow is substantially higher
than predicted by TR-55.
Basha 共1994兲 presented an analytical solution for the case of a
triangular hydrograph and ᐉ / m = 2 for which the functional form
using the writer’s notation is as follows:
V
Vi
= ␺⬙
Qⴱ
Ip
冉,R,M 冑 冊tr
IN
, ᐉ/m = 2, tr/tc = 1 共31兲
in which M and N are as in Eqs. 共2兲 and 共3兲. The writer’s analysis,
as represented by Eq. 共29兲, excludes the third term in the paren-
theses in Eq. 共31兲. Interestingly, Basha 共1994兲 obtained an excel-
lent fit for his V / Vi versus Qⴱ / I p for R = 1.75 over various values
of M 冑tr / 共IN兲; that is, Basha’s fit shows essentially an indepen-
dence of M 冑tr / 共IN兲, in agreement with Eq. 共29兲 herein. That fit
is plotted in Fig. 2共c兲, where it is seen to agree very well with
the curve for ᐉ / m = 2, tr / tc = 1, and R = 1.67. Basha 共1994兲 also
plotted V / Vi versus Qⴱ / I p for relationships given by Kessler and
Diskin 共1991兲 and McEnroe 共1992兲 共also presumably for ᐉ / m
= 2兲, which shows those relationships to be close to those of
Basha. Since Kessler and Diskin 共1991兲 and McEnroe 共1992兲
used gamma probability distributions to represent the inflow hy-
drograph, Basha 共1994兲 suggested that the maximum outflow val-
ues “are rather insensitive to the shape of the inflow hydrograph,”
which is consistent with the aforementioned agreement with the
curve herein. However, that is limited to tr ⬵ tc, as indicated
by Fig. 2共c兲. Basha 共1995兲 extended his analytical solution using
a perturbation technique, the accuracy of which is greatest
for ᐉ / m close to 2. All of the methods discussed in this para-
graph are limited to the case of storm duration equal to time of
concentration.
 Table 1. Detention Basin Design Example
ᐉ/m=2 ᐉ/m=2/3 ᐉ/m=2 ᐉ/m=2/3
tr i m/h I p m3 / s
ⴱ
共min兲 tr / tc 共in./h兲 共cu ft/s兲 Vi / 共I ptc兲 Q / Ip V / Vi V / 共I ptc兲 V / Vi V / 共I ptc兲 V 共m 兲
3
V 共ft 兲
3
V 共m3兲 V 共ft3兲
15 共tc兲 1 0.102共4.0兲 0.572共20.2兲 1.335 0.225 0.716 0.956 0.790 1.055 492.1 17,378 542.9 19,174
30 2 0.071共2.8兲 0.400共14.1兲 2.335 0.322 0.68 1.588 0.765 1.786 571.6 20,206 643.1 22,732
45 3 0.056共2.2兲 0.315共11.1兲 3.335 0.409 0.635 2.118 0.735 2.451 600.4 21,175 694.9 24,510
60 4 0.048共1.9兲 0.272共9.60兲 4.335 0.474 0.601 2.605 0.713 3.091 637.8 22,498 756.6 26,691
75 5 0.043共1.7兲 0.243共8.59兲 5.335 0.530 0.568 3.030 0.691 3.686 662.7 23,413 806.2 28,484
90 6 0.038共1.5兲 0.214共7.58兲 6.335 0.600 0.521 3.301 0.656 4.156 635.7 22,501 800.4 28,332
150 10 0.025共1.0兲 0.143共5.05兲 10.335 0.901 0.263 2.718 0.431 4.454 349.8 12,354 573.3 20,245
Note: Bold font corresponds to critical duration.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 03/03/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Numerous other generalized solutions have been presented,
e.g., those of Hager and Sinniger 共1985兲, Hager 共1994兲, McEnroe
共1992兲, Bailey 共1994兲, and Diskin and Kessler 共1994兲. However,
they lack the ability to consider different storm durations, the
limitations of which will be discussed in a future publication.
Example
An example of the use of the above is shown in Table 1, which
should be self-explanatory. The time of concentration tc is 15 min
and successively larger storm durations tr are considered. The
rainfall intensity i is taken from intensity-duration-frequency data
for each storm duration for the location and return period of in-
terest. The basin peak inflow decreases in proportion to the de-
crease in rainfall intensity as the storm duration increases. The
desired peak outflow Qⴱ is fixed, so the ratio Qⴱ / I p increases in
proportion to the decrease in I p. The ratio of required storage
volume to inflow volume V / Vi is obtained from generalized
curves prepared, as described above, in this case for ᐉ / m = 2 and
ᐉ / m = 2 / 3, the physical significance of which will be discussed in
a future publication. The required storage volume, given by the
product 共V / Vi兲Vi, has a maximum value at a storm duration of
approximately 75 min. The required storage volume can be seen
to be greater for the lower value of ᐉ / m. Additional examples are
presented for roof storage in Graber 共2009兲 and will be presented
for detention basins from the writer’s practice in a future publi-
cation.
Conclusions
A generalized numerical solution for detention basin design al-
lows for the preliminary design of such basins in some cases and
final design in certain other situations. The purpose of the present
paper is to provide a particularly useful generalized solution, re-
late it to certain other solutions, and set the stage for practical
applications for roof detention 共Graber 2009兲 and discussion of
the rationale and use of such a solution for detention basin design
more generally. The generalized numerical solution derived
herein provides results that can be applied to practical problems
in certain cases and demonstrates the general importance of storm
duration. The method utilizes a trapezoidal inflow hydrograph,
which includes the important effect of storm duration based on
the modified rational method. The generalized equations are
solved numerically, yielding convenient charts which are pre-
sented to display the relationship between the variables. The deri-
vation provides the basis for specializing the method in Graber
共2009兲 to provide generalized curves applicable to storage deten-
tion on roofs.
Although the results presented herein are more generalized
than presented by others, certain other methods are shown to
compare favorably for special cases. An added perspective is pro-
vided on some of those other methods. SCS TR-55 curves are
included in the comparisons, which demonstrates their limita-
tions. An example demonstrates application of the generalized
curves.
Acknowledgments
The writer gratefully acknowledges Mr. Mark T. Donohoe, cur-
rently of Acton Survey and Engineering, for the initial opportuni-
ties to analyze and design numerous detention basins and develop
the generalized methodology presented herein. Thanks are also
due to Mr. Donohoe for the many stimulating discussions regard-
ing drainage hydrology and hydraulics over the years.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
B ⫽ I ptcM ᐉ/m / 共NIᐉ/m
p 兲, dimensionless ratio;
H ⫽ elevation measured upward from the elevation at
which effective storage and outflow begin;
I ⫽ volumetric inflow rate;
I p ⫽ peak volumetric inflow rate;
i ⫽ average rainfall intensity;
ᐉ ⫽ exponent in storage-elevation relationship 关Eq. 共2兲兴;
M ⫽ coefficient in outflow-elevation relationship 关Eq. 共3兲兴;
m ⫽ exponent in outflow-elevation relationship 关Eq. 共3兲兴;
N ⫽ coefficient in storage-elevation relationship 关Eq. 共2兲兴;
Q ⫽ volumetric outflow rate;
Qⴱ ⫽ peak outflow;
R ⫽ ratio of duration of receding limb of inflow hydrograph
to duration of rising limb;
S ⫽ effective storage volume;
t ⫽ time from start of rainfall;
tc ⫽ time of concentration;
tr ⫽ duration of rainfall;
tⴱ ⫽ time of peak outflow;
V ⫽ maximum storage volume; and
Vi ⫽ inflow volume.

JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2009 / 491

J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2009.135:487-492.

 References
Bailey, W. R. 共1994兲. “Discussion of ‘Preliminary sizing of detention
reservoirs to reduce peak discharges’ by B. McEnroe.” J. Hydraul.
Eng., 120共3兲, 417–420.
Basha, H. A. 共1994兲. “Nonlinear reservoir routing: Particular analytical
solution.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 120共5兲, 624–632.
Basha, H. A. 共1995兲. “Routing equations for detention reservoirs.”
J. Hydraul. Eng., 121共12兲, 885–888.
Chien, J.-S., and Saigal, K. K. 共1974兲. “Urban runoff by linearized sub-
hydrographic method.” J. Hydr. Div., 100共8兲, 1141–1157.
Diskin, M. H., and Kessler, A. 共1994兲. “Discussion of ‘Preliminary sizing
of detention reservoirs to reduce peak discharges’ by B. McEnroe.”
J. Hydraul. Eng., 120共3兲, 420–422.
Graber, S. D. 共2009兲. “Rain loads and flow attenuation on roofs.”
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Columbia University on 03/03/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
J. Archit. Eng., 15共3兲, in press.
Hager, W. H. 共1994兲. “Discussion of ‘Preliminary sizing of detention
reservoirs to reduce peak discharges’ by B. McEnroe.” J. Hydraul.
Eng., 120共3兲, 422–425.
492 / JOURNAL OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2009
J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2009.135:487-492.
Hager, W. H., and Sinniger, R. 共1985兲. “Flood storage in reservoirs.”
J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 111共1兲, 76–85.
Hildebrand, F. B. 共1962兲. Advanced calculus for applications, Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Secs. 3.5 and 7.10.
Kessler, A., and Diskin, M. H. 共1991兲. “The efficiency function of deten-
tion reservoirs in urban drainage systems.” Water Resour. Res., 27,
253–258.
McCuen, R. H. 共1982兲. A guide to hydrologic analysis using SCS meth-
ods, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
McEnroe, B. M. 共1992兲. “Preliminary sizing of detention reservoirs to
reduce peak discharges.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 118共11兲, 1540–1549.
Soil Conservation Service 共SCS兲. 共1986兲. “Urban hydrology for small
watersheds,” Technical Release No. 55, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
Tourbier, J. T., and Westmacott, R. 共1981兲. Water resources protection
technology: A handbook of measures to protect water resources in
land development, Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 共USBR兲. 共1965兲. Design of small dams, U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., 42–44.