The uncertainties of synthetic unit hydrographs applied for basins with different runoff generation processes

Pedroso, Andreia; Mannich, Michael

doi:10.1590/2318-0331.262120210093

Andreia Pedroso

Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, PR, Brasil

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3084-5867

Michael Mannich

Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, PR, Brasil

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5727-2563

E-mails: pedroso.ea@gmail.com (AP), mannich@ufpr.br (MM)

Authors contributions

Andreia Pedroso: Methodology desing, Writing - Original Draft, data curation, investigation, visualization, formal analysis.

Michael Mannich: paper conceptualization, methodology desing, writing - original draft, writing - review & editing, visualization, formal analysis, supervision.

Editor-in-Chief: Adilson Pinheiro

Associated Editor: Priscilla Macedo Moura

Figures (9)
Tables (6)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Geographical location of basins, gauge and rain gauge stations used in this study. Maps also show the land use based on Instituto de Terras, Cartografia e Geologia do Paraná (2001Instituto de Terras, Cartografia e Geologia do Paraná – ITCG. (2001). Mapa de uso do solo - 2001/2002. Curitiba.) applied to define the CN parameter. The basins are predominantly rural, composed of areas of agriculture and forest. Satellite images were used to identify and validate the classes. Urban residences, industrial zones and rural facilities were classified as impervious areas. Dashed line at Pequeno River basin indicates the zone of influence of the rain gauge stations defined by Thiessen polygons.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Rating curves for Pequeno River (A) and Espingarda River (B). Measured data which represent deviations from the interpolated rating curve higher than 20% were highlighted. Rating curves were valid for different periods.

Thumbnail

Figure 3
Comparison between average daily flow and maximum daily flow from a 15-minute resolution flow series for Pequeno River between 2013-2017. Relative error is shown in the colormap. Red cross data are highlighted as average flow higher than maximum daily flow which is inconsistent and will not be explorer herein.

Thumbnail

Figure 4
Observed runoff hydrographs and SUH for the Pequeno River basin. SUH was shown as envelope bounding curves from all simulations (according to parameters from ) for each rainfall return period. (A) T=2 years; (B) T=5 years; (C) T=10 years; (D) T=50 years.

Thumbnail

Figure 5
Observed runoff hydrographs and SUH for the Espingarda River basin. SUH was shown as envelope bounding curves from all simulations (according to parameters from ) for each rainfall return period. (A) T=2 years; (B) T=5 years; (C) T=10 years; (D) T=50 years.

Thumbnail

Figure 6
Simulated from SUH and observed ratio of peak flow (Q_SUH/Q_OBS) as function of return period (T) and the three SUH methods. The lower case OBS means observations and SUH the simulated flows. The excess rainfall was estimated from CN parameter. (A) Conservative result of Pequeno River basin; (B) Bold result of Pequeno River basin gauge; (C) Conservative result of Espingarda River basin; (D) Bold result of Espingarda River basin. Note the different vertical scales.

Thumbnail

Figure 7
Simulated from SUH and observed ratio of peak flow (Q_SUH/Q_OBS) as function of the ratio between Pe_SUH/Peφ and the three SUH methods. (A) Conservative result of Pequeno River basin; (B) Bold result of Pequeno River basin gauge; (C) Conservative result of Espingarda River basin; (D) Bold result of Espingarda River basin. Note the different vertical scales.

Thumbnail

Figure 8
Simulated and observed ratio of peak flow as function of return period, for excess rainfall computed from measurements. (A) Pequeno River basin; (B) Espingarda River basin.

Thumbnail

Figure 9
Simulated and observed ratio of peak flow (Q_SUH/Q_OBS) for excess rainfall computed form SCS method (data from , , and ) versus the peak flow ratio computed from the excess rainfall determined by the index φ method (data from ). (A) Pequeno River basin; (B) Espingarda River basin.

Thumbnail

Table 1
Selected gauges for each basin.

Thumbnail

Table 2
Data availability of ANA database in the State of Paraná as function of drainage area.

Thumbnail

Table 3
Maximum and minimum values of the SUH methods parameters, and the CN method for excess rainfall calculation.

Thumbnail

Table 4
Morphometric characteristics.

Thumbnail

Table 5
Parameter’s combinations of conservative and bold approaches.

Thumbnail

Table 6
Peak flow estimation ratio (Q_SHU/Q_OBS) ranges for SUH simulation with excess rainfall computed from the SCS-CN method and from runoff measurements by φ index method.

Basin	Area¹ 1 At the gauge station section. [km²]	Related gauges	Data size
Pequeno River	105	Fazendinha (65010000)	28/01/1955
		Fazendinha (65010000)	31/12/2014
		Fazendinha (2549017)	01/01/1982
		Fazendinha (2549017)	31/12/2016
		Mananciais da Serra (2548041)	01/09/1916
		Mananciais da Serra (2548041)	31/12/2015
Espingarda River	65	Porto Vitória (65365000)	19/11/1945
		Porto Vitória (65365000)	31/12/2014
		Usina Bituruna (2651015)	01/03/1956
		Usina Bituruna (2651015)	01/08/2007

Area (A) [km²]	Number of gauges	Gauges with more than 30 years of data	Gauges with more than 50 years of data
A≤250	147	4	2
250<A≤500	35	4	1
500<A≤1000	50	8	2
1000<A	201	42	21

Method	Parameter	Pequeno River basin		Espingarda River basin
Method	Parameter	min	max	min	max
---	tc (h)	5.30	6.11	1.83	2.52
CN	CN	54	78	68	84
	S (mm)	216	72	120	48
	Ia (mm)	43	14	24	10
SUH Snyder	Ct	1.8	2.2	1.8	2.2
	Cp	0.56	0.69	0.56	0.69
	tp (h)	7.85	9.60	4.62	5.65
SUH SCS	tp (min)	191	220	65.8	91.8
SUH Clark	K (h)	3.18	3.67	1.10	1.51

Basin	Length of the main river (km)	Length of the main river to basin centroid (km)	Altitude variation (m)	Mean slope of the main river (m/m)
Pequeno River basin	27	13	224	0.008
Espingarda River basin	12	5	314	0.026

Result	CN	SCS	Snyder		Clark
Result	CN	tp	Ct	Cp	K
Conservative	Max	Min	Min	Max	Min
Bold	Min	Max	Max	Min	Max

SUH	Excess rainfall	Parameter	Pequeno River basin	Espingarda River basin
SCS	CN	Conserv.	8.82-58.6	1.46-8.64
	CN	Bold	1.37-10.6	0.45-3.51
	φ	Conserv.	2.78-8.87	4.85-9.65
	φ	Bold	2.70-8.63	4.56-9.08
Clark	CN	Conserv.	7.48-49.7	1.22-7.23
	CN	Bold	1.33-9.21	0.36-2.90
	φ	Conserv.	2.29-7.30	3.99-7.94
	φ	Bold	2.20-7.03	3.76-7.49
Snyder	CN	Conserv.	5.47-36.3	0.66-3.95
	CN	Bold	0.73-4.89	0.13-1.04
	φ	Conserv.	1.57-5.00	1.99-3.97
	φ	Bold	1.08-3.45	1.35-2.69

[1] E-mails: pedroso.ea@gmail.com (AP), mannich@ufpr.br (MM)

Brasil

Brasil

The uncertainties of synthetic unit hydrographs applied for basins with different runoff generation processes

Incertezas de hidrogramas unitários sintéticos aplicados a bacias com diferentes processos de geração de escoamento

ABSTRACT