METEOROLOGICAL D A T A ANALYSIS

FOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM D E S I G N

By Barry J. Adams, 1 M. ASCE, Hugh G. Fraser,2

Charles D . D . H o w a r d / M. ASCE,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and M. Sami Hanafy 4

ABSTRACT: The frequency analysis of point rainfall data is examined. Particular

emphasis is placed on the distinction between meteorological events observed
in nature and the definition of events for statistical analysis. A meteorological
event may involve several periods of intermittent rain, all of which are asso-
ciated with the same atmospheric disturbance. The return period of such an
event is determined from analysis of synoptic data. In contrast, statistical events
are based on the external characteristics (volume, duration, average intensity,
and interevent time) of recorded rainfall, without reference to the return period
of the synoptic conditions which caused that rainfall. Statistics of storm event
characteristics are calculated, correlations between characteristics are explored,
and probability density functions for individual storm event characteristics and
for combinations of characteristics are developed. Intensity-duration-frequency,
volume-duration-frequency, and intensity-volume-frequency analyses are per-
formed. A frequency analysis on rainfall volumes demonstrates that event vol-
umes derived from an intensity-duration frequency (IDF) curve do not have the
same frequency as that IDF curve. It is concluded that for a particular location,
there is no single design storm that is suitable for all types of drainage designs.

INTRODUCTION

Urban drainage systems are composed of: (1) A n input meteorology

(rainfall/snowmelt); (2) a catchment transforming the meteorologic input
to runoff; (3) engineered elements of the drainage system such as trans-
port elements (pipes, channels), storage elements (reservoirs), a n d treat-
ment elements (centralized treatment plants, overflow treatment de-
vices); and (4) receiving waters. A major problem in the planning a n d
design of the engineered elements of the system is to establish the size,
configuration, and operation of these elements to best meet the perfor-
mance objectives of the drainage system. Since the performance objec-
tives are generally expressed in terms of frequency of occurrence, it is
necessary to describe the meteorological input probabilistically. Histor-
ically, there has been a tendency to describe a meteorologic event by a
return period or frequency of occurrence. This h a d led to t h e concept
of a design storm of a specified return period.
•'Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Can-
ada M5S 1A4.
2
Research Engr., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Can-
ada KIN 6N5; formerly, Grad. Research Asst., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ. of
Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1A4.
3
Pres., Charles Howard and Associates, 300-1144 Fort St., Victoria, British Co-
lumbia, Canada V8V 3K8.
4
Civ. Engr., The Proctor and Redfern Group, 45 Green Belt Dr., Don Mills,
Ontario, Canada M3C 3K3; formerly, Research Engr., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Univ.
of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1A4.
Note.—Discussion open until March 1, 1987. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The
manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on
August 28, 1984. This paper is part of the Journal of Environmental Engineering,
Vol. 112, No. 5, October, 1986. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9372/86/0005-0827/$01.00. Pa-
per No. 20925.

827

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 There are two important problems with this concept. First, the return
period of the overall weather system causing the rainfall is seldom, if
ever, considered. Since one intense weather system could cause several
isolated heavy rainstorms, there is difficulty including the return period
of the atmospheric disturbance in the calculation of the return period of
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the runoff produced by the isolated rainstorms. Second, the isolated

rainstorms themselves possess several characteristics, any of which could
be analyzed to determine their own return period. The isolated rain-
storm itself does not possess a unique frequency—it is only the char-
acteristics of the storm that can be used to define a characteristic fre-
quency.
For example, an isolated meteorological event, at one point in space
as described by a hyetograph, has both external and internal character-
istics. The external characteristics are the total volume of the storm, the
total duration of the storm, the average intensity of the storm, and the
interevent time or duration since the last storm. The internal character-
istics are both more numerous and more complicated and include such
characteristics as the time to peak intensity, the number of peaks, the
distribution of volume about the peak(s), etc. Considering this isolated
meteorological event, the event itself does not have a unique frequency
when analyzed in this manner. This paper is confined to: (1) Rainfall
events (with no loss of generality since snowmelt can be analyzed anal-
ogously); (2) point rainfall; and (3) external characteristics of the events
(also with no loss of generality). Only the characteristics of the event
(such as volume) or combinations of characteristics (such as intensity
and duration) have unique frequencies. Moreover, the different char-
acteristics or combinations of characteristics of an isolated meteorological
event possess different frequencies (e.g., the same event may have a 10-
yr return period volume and a 20-yr return period intensity).
This observation renders the selection of a single design storm for de-
sign purposes more or less arbitrary. The reason for this lies in the fact
that the different engineered elements of the drainage system are sen-
sitive to different characteristics of the meteorological event. For exam-
ple, the design of the transport elements, such as pipes, is generally
most sensitive to the intensity-duration characteristics of the event since
these characteristics largely influence the magnitude of the peak of the
runoff hydrograph. On the other hand, the design of storage elements
such as reservoirs is generally sensitive to the volume and interevent
time characteristics of the event. In a given storm, the volume, inter-
event time, intensity, and duration generally have different return pe-
riods. Therefore, if a single design storm is used for the design of dif-
ferent engineered elements of a drainage system, those elements will be
designed for different frequencies.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze meteorological data in a man-
ner that would overcome this serious problem. In this analysis, three
issues emerge: (1) The distinction between meteorological events and
statistical events, the latter of which is defined in terms of the charac-
teristics of the former; (2) the distinction between two fundamentally
different forms of analysis—the moving window analysis versus the storm
event analysis—that is necessary to accommodate the different statistical
828

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 event definitions; and (3) the distinction between the analysis of isolated
events and the continuous analysis of the population of events.

METEOROLOGICAL VERSUS STATISTICAL EVENTS

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

As discussed previously, every isolated meteorological event pos-

sesses the external characteristics of volume (v), duration (t), average
intensity (z), and interevent time (b), where volume, intensity, and du-
ration are related by the following equation:
v = i-t (1)
This equation is plotted as a surface in three-dimensional space in Fig.
1. The shape of this surface may also be visualized in two-dimensional
space by holding one of the characteristics constant. For example, if vol-
ume is held constant, an isovolume line may be plotted in i-t space as
shown in Fig. 2(a). Such isovolume lines are rectangular hyperbolas and

FIG. 1 .—Volume-Intensity-Duration Surface

(a) (b)

FIG. 2.—Statistical Event Spaces in (i,t), (v,t), and (i,v) Planes

829

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 \ 1
W A, J
A — i i - .
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

7 ». '-"°

(a) -/ (b) -• (c)

FIG. 3.—Statistical Event Spaces in (i,t), (v,t), and (i,v) Planes: (a) (i > i „ U
t„); (ft) (»' £ / „ , » £ »„); (c) (v > v0, t > („)

demonstrate the relationship between intensity and duration for the given
isovolume conditions. Similarly, isointensity lines are linear in v-t space
while isoduration lines are linear in v-i space as shown in Fig. 2(a).
A statistical event in hydrology is generally defined by a random vari-
able equaling or exceeding a certain magnitude. Considering the three
meteorological event characteristics (v, i,t) as random variables, a variety
of statistical events may be defined as follows: (v a v0), (i a i0), (t £ t0),
(i > r„, t> t0), etc. Further defining the statistical events in terms of the
three random variables simultaneously results in the following six sta-
tistical event spaces:

A,: (» > i > f0, u > u0)

A2:(f>
A3: (i ^ , t > t0, V > V0)
A 4 : (i > f s t„ , V ^ U0)
A5: (» < . . t ^ t0, v< v„)
A6: (» < i0, t > t0,v < v0)

These event spaces are shown in Fig. 2(b). The event spaces A\-A6 can
be further grouped to define other statistical events. For example, the
event (i > f0, f > t0) is also defined by Ax; the event (i a i0, v £ v0) is
defined by Ax + A2; and the event (v s u„, t & £„) is defined by At +
A 3 , as shown in Figs. 3(a)-(c), respectively. Similarly, the event (v a v0)
is defined b y A i + A2 + A3, the event (i s i0) is defined by Ai + A2 +
A4 and the event (t > t0) is defined b y A j + A 3 + A 6 . Only the event
space A 5 corresponds to less-than-or-equal-to inequalities for all three
characteristics.

INTEREVENT TIME (IET)

A long-term hyetograph consists of a series of rainfall pulses through

time. In order to define a storm event, it is necessary to state when the
event begins and ends. Two consecutive rainfall pulses are separated by
a period of time without rainfall. If the time period between consecutive
rainfall pulses is "short," there is a tendency to categorize the two pulses
of rainfall as belonging to the same event. Conversely, if the time period
between rainfall pulses is "long," the tendency is to categorize the two
pulses of rainfall as being different events. Two types of meteorological
830

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 data analysis are of interest: the storm event analysis and the moving
window analysis. The storm event analysis requires a definition of the
minimum interevent time required to distinguish between two separate
storms; the moving window analysis does not require such a definition.
In the storm event analysis, the minimum interevent period between
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

consecutive pulses of rainfall must be specified to determine when one

event ends and the next event begins. If the actual interevent period is
less than that specified, the two pulses of rainfall are categorized as be-
longing to the same event. If the actual interevent period is greater than
that specified, the two pulses of rainfall are categorized as belonging to
different events. In this analysis, a range of minimum interevent periods
is considered: from 5 to 720 min. In practice, the interevent time defi-
nition is governed by the application. For example, on small catchments
with small storage reservoirs, shorter interevent time definitions would
be required. For large catchments on which natural routing of runoff
takes place, or on catchments with large storage reservoirs, longer in-
terevent time definitions would be adequate. Once a minimum inter-
event time definition is specified, the analysis proceeds as follows. It is
also noted that distinctions between storm events may also be made on
a statistical basis (1,2,4-7).
The rainfall data are clocktime records of every 0.01 in. (0.25 mm) of
rainfall. The rainfall record employed in this study was digitized by the
City of Vancouver Engineering Department from tipping bucket rain to
gage strip charts. The City Hall rainfall record spans an 18-yr period
from 1957 to 1975. Although the rainfall record is specific to the City of
Vancouver, the type of analysis discussed herein is applicable to any
meteorological station.
The occurrence of a storm event is defined by a minimum interevent
time. If two clocktime records of rainfall are separated by a time period
greater than the minimum interevent time, then the records are consid-
ered to belong to different events. The start of an event is marked by
the first 0.01 in. (0.25 mm) of rainfall occurring after a time period greater
than the minimum interevent time. The end of an event is marked by
the clocktime followed by a time period greater than the minimum in-
terevent time. The volume, duration, average intensity, and interevent
time can then be precisely determined for every rainfall event in the
record. In this analysis, one further condition is added to relieve some
of the computational burden. Since the Vancouver climate contains many
small storms, a storm must contain at least 0.02 in. (0.5 mm) of rainfall
to be considered here as an event. For other stations, this condition may •
not be required. This condition eliminated about 50 events per year from
the analysis, which accounted for an annual average precipitation vol-
ume of about 1 in. (25 mm), for the short IET definitions only.
With the preceding storm event definition, the statistics of rainfall vol-
ume, duration, average intensity, and interevent time can be determined
from the record. The rainfall volume of each event is determined by
counting the number of times the rain gage registered 0.01 in. (0.25 mm)
of rainfall from the beginning to the end of the event. These volumes
are summed to yield the total event volume. The duration of the event
is determined by subtracting the first clocktime from the last clocktime
of the event. The average intensity of the event, hereafter termed simply
831

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 intensity, is determined by dividing the volume by the duration. The
interevent time is determined by substracting the clocktime of the end
of the last event from the clocktime of the beginning of the current event.
This first step in the storm event analysis procedure converts the hye-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tograph record into an event record. The volume, intensity, duration,

and interevent time of these storm events can then be examined statis-
tically.

STORM EVENT ANALYSIS

With storm events identified as described previously, the statistical

properties of the storm event characteristics were examined. Firstly, the
statistics of the volume, intensity, duration, and interevent time were
analyzed to determine how they change with different interevent time
definitions. Secondly, the correlation among the characteristics was ex-
amined to determine their relative dependence. Finally, probability den-
sity functions were fitted to the histograms of the characteristics.

TABLE 1.—Statistics of Rainfall Characteristics from Storm Event Analysis

IET Number of
definition events Storm event Standard Coefficient
(min) (number/yr) characteristics Mean (1/mean) deviation SKewness of variation
(D (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
5 8,019 Duration (h) 0.26 3.8578 0.44 7.59 1.690
Intensity (mm/h) 6.50 0.1538 3.11 4.75 0.4785
(446) Volume (mm) 1.41 0.7113 2.28 8.84 1.617
Interevent time (h) 19.37 0.0516 64.06 6.61 3.307
10 8,660 Duration (h) 0.63 1.5780 1.05 5.98 1.667
Intensity (mm/h) 3.84 0.2603 2.35 6.17 0.612
(481) Volume (mm) 2.11 0.4749 3.86 8.76 1.829
Interevent time (h) 17.55 0.0570 56.72 7.35 3.232
15 7,971 Duration (h) 0.98 0.0170 1.54 4.70 1.5714
Intensity (mm/h) 3.01 0.3322 2.09 6.71 0.6944
(443) Volume (mm) 2.62 0.3816 4.76 7.00 1.8168
Interevent time (h) 18.77 0.0533 56.69 7.03 3.0202
30 6,276 Duration (h) 1.87 0.5356 2.65 3.56 1.4171
Intensity (mm/h) 2.25 0.4442 1.97 6.00 0.8756
(349) Volume (mm) 3.70 0.2700 6.58 5.97 1.7784
Interevent time (h) 23.23 0.0431 61.20 6.50 2.6345
60 4,782 Duration (h) 3.14 0.3180 4.03 2.92 1.2834
Intensity (mm/h) 1.86 0.5379 1.91 6.34 1.0269
(266) Volume (mm) 5.04 0.1986 8.41 5.01 1.6687
Interevent time (h) 29.79 0.0336 67.20 5.75 ,2.2558
120 3,659 Duration (h) 5.02 0.1993 5.83 2.51 1.1614
Intensity (mm/h) 1.59 0.6273 1.80 6.50 1.1321
(203) Volume (mm) 6.67 0.1500 10.27 4.19 1.5397
Interevent time (h) 38.03 0.0263 73.93 5.09 1.9440
180 3,147 Duration (h) 6.52 0.1533 7.16 2.13 1.098
Intensity (mm/h) 1.48 0.6763 1.81 7.07 1.223
(175) Volume (mm) 7.78 0.1285 11.31 3.74 1.4537
Interevent time (h) 43.53 0.0230 77.92 4.81 1.790
360 2,367 Duration (h) 10.74 0.0931 11.08 2.04 1.0317
Intensity (mm/h) 1.25 0.8009 1.58 6.99 1.264
(132) Volume (mm) 10.39 0.0963 13.88 3.37 1.3359
Interevent time (h) 55.82 0.0179 85.62 4.38 1.5339
720 1,748 Duration (h) 18.63 0.0537 21.15 2.94 1.1353
Intensity (mm/h) 1.07 0.9354 1.58 8.18 1.4766
(97) Volume (mm) 14.08 0.0710 19.19 4.57 1.3629
Interevent time (h) 71.49 0.0140 93.50 4.02 1.3079

832

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 Statistics of Storm Event Characteristics
To examine the relationships between the statistics of the storm event
characteristics and the interevent time definition, the IET definition was
varied from 5 to 720 min. For each IET definition, each storm event in
the record was determined, and the statistics for each characteristic were
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

calculated. The mean, standard deviation, skewness, and coefficient of

variation were computed for each characteristic and for each IET defi-
nition. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 1 and Figs.
4-7.
The means and standard deviations of volume, duration, and inter-
event time increase with increasing IET definition, while those of inten-
sity decrease as expected. Above an IET definition of about 3 hrs, the
relationships become approximately linear. The coefficient of variation
and skewness for volume, duration, and interevent time decrease, at a
decreasing rate, and appear to tend toward asymptotes. The coefficient
of variation and skewness for intensity are approximately monotonically
increasing with IET definition. In some of these cases, the relationships
show anomalies in the form of curves changing direction at small IET
definitions. This is explained by the many occurrences of rainfall that
are ignored because they are separated by a time period less than the
minimum IET and they contain a volume of less than 0.02 in. (0.5 mm).
As the IET definition increases, these small volumes become part of other
storms and further change the statistics.
From the foregoing analysis of this meteorological record, it is con-
Paramotar Cuivea for I n t i m i t y Onrn/rir}

St 11111 leal Paramalar Cutvaa for Vohtm» (mm) 81 and art) Da via I ton

H4TEREVEHT TIME DEFINITION (hra) INTEREVENT TIME DEFWITION (hra)

FIG. 4.—Volume Statistics from Storm FIG. 5.—Intensity Statistics from Storm
Event Analysis Event Analysis

Slallallcal Parameter Curvaa (or Duration (hra)

INTEREVENT TIME DEFINITION (tira)

FIG. 6.—Duration Statistics from Storm FIG. 7.—Interevent Time Statistics from
Event Analysis Storm Event Analysis

833

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 eluded that an IET definition of less than 1 hr would result in event
characteristics that are probably more dependent on the analysis pro-
cedure than would be useful for any practical application. IET definitions
between 1 and 6 hrs would seem appropriate for most applications.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Correlation between Storm Event Characteristics

A correlation analysis was performed to identify the degree of depen-
dence among the storm event characteristics. This information is useful
for any additional analysis involving manipulation of probability density
functions of these characteristics. Correlation was determined both by
calculating product-moment correlation coefficients between pairs of
characteristics and by plotting scatter diagrams or scattergrams. The cal-
culated correlation coefficients are presented in Table 2 and the scatter-
grams are presented in Figs. 8-13. These results demonstrate that the
correlations between intensity and volume, intensity and interevent time,
volume and interevent time, and duration and interevent time are near
zero. For practical purposes, it can be concluded that volume, duration,
and intensity are all independent of interevent time and that, within a
storm event, volume and intensity are independent. The correlation
coefficients between intensity and duration vary between -0.1 and -0.2,
depending on IET definition. This slightly negative correlation may be
unimportant for many practical applications. The scattergram in Fig. 8
for intensity and duration also shows the same trend that with increas-
ing duration there is a tendency for intensity to decrease.
The correlation coefficients between volume and duration vary be-
tween 0.81 and 0.96, depending on IET definition. This is shown in the
scattergram in Fig. 9, in which there is a fairly linear dependence be-
tween the two characteristics. Similar results were reported previously
when hourly rainfall data was analyzed for 35 stations in Canada (1).
The current analysis confirms these findings for the short duration sam-
ple interval available in the Vancouver rainfall data record.

Probability Density Functions

The rainfall record was organized into a series of events for each IET

TABLE 2.—Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients for Storm Event Character-

istics
IET
definition Intensity- Intensity- Volume- Intensity Volume Duration
(min) duration volume duration IET IET IET
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
5 -0.2078 -0.0892 0.9611 0.0803 -0.0314 -0.0450
10 -0.1333 -0.0056 0.9488 0.0647 -0.0168 -0.0189
15 -0.1060 0.0322 0.9348 0.0714 -0.0165 -0.0167
30 -0.0958 0.0625 0.9037 0.0708 -0.0001 -0.0118
60 -0.1056 0.0704 0.8835 0.0827 -0.0038 -0.0212
120 -0.1266 0.0660 0.8560 0.0770 -0.0107 -0.0330
180 -0.1433 0.0580 0.8298 0.0606 -0.0275 -0.0465
360 -0.1734 0.0533 0.8031 0.0314 -0.0513 -0.0591
720 -0.1750 0.0109 0.8081 0.0365 -0.0610 -0.0754

834

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40
DURATION (hr)

FIG. 8.—Scattergram of Intensity and FIG. 9.—Scattergram of Volume and

Duration Duration

:t
FIG. 10.—Scattergram of Intensity and FIG. 11.—Scattergram of Intensity and
Volume Interevent (IE) Time

2S
£

i ?•
2 i»t
20 ["

o^fat-^i.
. ^ 0 30 40 60 60 100 130
IE TIME <hr) HO 1
140 160 180 200

FIG. 12.—Scattergram of Volume and FIG. 13.—Scattergram of Duration and

Interevent Time Interevent Time

definition, and the magnitudes of each characteristic for each event were
used to define a sample record for each characteristic. A frequency anal-
ysis was then conducted on each characteristic by counting the number
of occurrences of magnitudes in a given interval and dividing by the
total number of occurrences to obtain the relative frequency of occur-
rence in each interval. The relative frequency was then normalized to
obtain the probability density. The resulting histograms are plotted in
Figs. 14-17 for the characteristics of duration, volume, intensity, and
interevent time, respectively.
835

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 14.—Histogram of Duration FIG. 15.—Histogram of Volume

WTEREVEKT TIME (hi)

FIG. 16.—Histogram of Intensity FIG. 17.—Histogram of Interevent Time

Continuous probability density functions (PDFs) were then fitted to

the histograms of the storm event characteristics. The shape of the his-
tograms suggests that the exponential or gamma PDFs may be fitted to
the data as has been noted by others (2,4,6). The PDF for the exponential
distribution is given by:
f(x) = ac~ax; x > 0 (2)
The single parameter, a, is the reciprocal of the mean of the PDF. The
exponential PDF requires the standard deviation to have the same value
as the mean when the coefficient of variation is unity. From Table 1 and
Figs. 4-7, it is seen that the coefficient of variation is close to unity for
IET definitions greater than 1 hr.
The PDF for the gamma distribution is given by:

fix) = :
r(«)c«
in which F(a)
-f
and a = x2/s2, c = x/a, x = mean, and s = standard deviation. The two
(3)

parameter gamma distribution preserves both the mean and the stan-
dard deviation of the sample.
The exponential and gamma PDFs are plotted for each storm event
characteristic in Figs. 14-17. In general, by visual observation, the gamma
distribution provides a better fit to the histograms than the exponential
distribution, particularly for volume and interevent time. For the storm
event characteristics of intensity and duration, the exponential and gamma
PDFs are very similar. In these cases, the simpler exponential PDF is
likely to be preferable since it is easier to manipulate.
For the Vancouver data, the exponential PDFs for the storm event
characteristics of volume, intensity, duration, and interevent time have
the following parameter values for a 1-hr IET definition:
836

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 fv(v) = ie-iv; i = 0.199/mm (5.05/in.) (4)
p;
/,(!) = pe~ ; (3 = 0.583 h/mm (13.7 hr/in.) (5)
fT(t) = Xe" w ; X = 0.318/hr (6)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

#
fB(b) = i|«T ; »»| = 0.0336/hr (7)

Joint Probability Density Functions

The joint distributions for (i,t), (v,t), and (i,v) may be derived from
the marginal or conditional distributions of i, t, and v depending on the
correlation between the pairs of characteristics.
Since the correlation analysis revealed i and t to be essentially inde-
pendent, the joint PDF of i and t, fi,r(i, t), may be obtained as a product
of their marginal distributions as follows:

M«',0 =//(«) "MO = X0e-Xf-p' ' (8)

The correlation analysis revealed that v and t exhibit a strong depen-
dence. Therefore, the joint PDF of v and t, fv,r(v, t), must be derived
from the conditional PDF/V/r(i>/£). The result of the derivation is given
in Eq. 9, and the details of the derivation may be found in Fraser (5).

fv,T(v,t) = *£e<-*/o-e« (9)

Since the correlation analysis revealed i and v to be essentially inde-

pendent, the joint PDF of i and v, fi,v(i, v), may be obtained as a product
of their marginal distributions as follows:
/,,„(«» =f,(i)-fv(v) = He-*-*' (10)
However, the PDF for volume fv{v) cannot be taken as Eq. 4, but rather
must be derived from the joint PDF of intensity and duration, fij{i,t),
since this distribution is assumed and since Eq. 1 must hold. This de-
rived PDF for volume is:

fv(v) = 2XpK0(2Vxlto) (11)

where K0 is a modified Bessel function of the first kind, first order (5).
Eq. 11 is plotted on the volume histogram in Fig. 15 and is seen to pro-
vide a better fit than Eq. 4. Substituting Eqs. 5 and 11 into Eq. 10 yields

flv{i,v) = 2Xp%(2Vx]to) e- p ' (12)

The preceding distributions allow the probability of an event to be
determined in any of the three planes (i,t), (i,v), or (v, t). With these
distributions, the intensity, duration, volume, and frequency relation-
ships can be discussed in detail.

INTENSITY-DURATION-FREQUENCY ANALYSIS

The rainfall intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) curve is one of the tools

most commonly used by the urban drainage designer. In conjunction
with the rational method, it has formed a basis for the design of billions
837

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 of dollars worth of storm and combined sewers in this century. Al-
though computer models are now displacing the rational method for
estimating runoff, the selection of design rainfall events for computer
modeling is often based on the return periods indicated by IDF curves.
In Canada, IDF curves are developed by some cities and by the Atmo-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

spheric Environment Service (AES) from rainfall records across the coun-
try. The method used by the AES is as follows. Rainfall data is archived
according to the maximum volume of rainfall which occurs in 5-, 10-,
15-, 30-, 60-, 120-, 180-, 360-, 720-, and 1,440-minute periods during each
day. From this data, the annual maximum volume that occurred in each
of these time periods is recorded. Using a Type 1 extreme value distri-
bution on this record, the frequency of the volumes in each of the time
intervals is estimated.
To examine the relationship between the frequency of the different
characteristics (volume, intensity, duration, and interevent time), the
statistical events must be defined. The AES defines an intensity-duration
event for a particular duration, t0, as the annual maximum intensity de-
termined as follows: t = t0, annual max|i = (v/t0)\. The volume that was
recorded during the time period t0 may have actually occurred during
some fraction of that period. Since the AES archiving system records
rainfall volumes for only specific values of t0, this system does not in-
form the user about the distribution of volume within t0. This is not a
restriction imposed by the data because with a continuous clocktime rec-
ord of rainfall, this approximation is unnecessary. For this reason, the
event definition was modified to deal with the actual duration of the
rainfall as follows: t £ t0, annual max|i = (v/t0)\. Rather than limiting
the analysis to annual maxima, all events can be used to form a partial
duration series, in which case the event would be defined as f s („, i
= (v/t0) > i0.
The AES type IDF curves were derived by scanning the clocktime rain-
fall record with the event definition: t s t0, annual max|z = (v/t0)\. The
extreme annual series was determined, and a Type 1 extreme value dis-
tribution was used to calculate the frequency of intensity and duration.
The IDF curves are presented as the solid lines in Fig. 18.
Theoretically, the AES type analysis examines only the rainfall for each
calendar day and ignores the possibility of a rainfall occurrence strad-
dling over two or more calendar days. To overcome this difficulty in
obtaining the true maximum rainfall volume for a specified time period,
t0, over a year, a so-called moving window analysis (MWA) was con-
ducted. A time window of the desired duration, t0, was translated across
the clocktime record for each year. The moving window was advanced
one clocktime at a time. Each time the window advanced, the number
of clocktimes within the window was counted to determine the volume
in that time period. This procedure was repeated for different durations
of t0. The events were then recorded and subjected to an AES type anal-
ysis. The resulting MWA type IDF curves are presented as dashed lines
in Fig. 18, which shows that the MWA type curves are essentially iden-
tical to the AES type curves for shorter durations, but for longer dura-
tions the MWA type IDF curves produce slightly larger intensities.
IDF curves may also be obtained by a storm event analysis. In the
storm event analysis, the average intensity and duration of each storm
838

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 A E S - T y p e IDF curves

— MWA-Type IDF curves

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

8 10 12 14 20 22 24
DURATION (hrs)

FIG. 18.—AES and MWA Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves

event is determined. The statistical event corresponding to the AES def-

inition, in terms of a partial duration series, is f s f„, i > i0. This def-
inition corresponds to the regions A2 and A 4 in Fig. 2(b). The scattergram
in Fig. 8 indicates that this definition produces high intensity events with
only relatively short durations since the long duration events do not have
large average intensities. Thus, the AES statistical event definition can-
not be used to develop IDF curves from an analysis of rainfall data that
has been aggregated into storm events because the duration of each event
is a characteristic of that event. The durations used in the AES type
analysis are chosen arbitrarily—they are not properties of complete rain-
fall events. Thus, the AES type analysis provides no information about
the frequency of event duration (or any characteristic other than intensity
for that matter) with these arbitrarily selected durations.
For analysis of complete storm events, another statistical event defi-
nition, t a t0, i s i0, can be used. With this definition, the exceedence
probabilities for the storm characteristics of intensity and duration are
determined by counting the number of events that have an intensity and
duration exceeding z„ and t0, respectively. Since all of the events ex-
ceeding i0 and t0 are counted, frequencies are calculated by the Weibull
plotting position formula rather than by an extreme value distribution.
Curves of the number of events versus intensity were constructed for
durations of complete storm events ranging from 5 minutes to 48 hours
[see Fraser (5)]. Curves showing the number of events for each return
period were also plotted on the graph. The points of intersection be-
tween the duration and return period curves are points of known in-
tensity, duration, and frequency. These points were plotted to construct
storm event analysis (SEA) IDF curves. The SEA IDF curves for a 60-
minute IET are plotted as solid lines in Fig. 19 and, for comparison, the
corresponding AES type curves are shown as dashed lines on the same
graph.
The two sets of IDF curves are quite different since the statistical events
839

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

DURATION (hrs)

FIG. 19.—SEA and AES intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves

used in the two analyses, although derived from the same meteorolog-
ical record, are from completely different populations. The SEA IDF curves
show lower intensities for all durations at a given return period. The
SEA IDF curves obviously cannot be used to determine the maximum
intensities that occur over short durations within a storm event. For de-
sign situations in which it is essential to identify the maximum intensity
that can occur in a short duration, the AES type IDF curve must be used.
However, in many design situations, perhaps in most, the short dura-
tion, high intensity rainfall is not a sufficient condition by itself for de-
termining an optimal drainage system design.

VOLUME-DURATION-FREQUENCY ANALYSIS

The AES type intensity-duration-frequency analysis previously dis-

cussed can be used to determine the annual maximum rainfall volume
within a given arbitrary time period and to estimate the frequencies of
the annual maximum volumes. The resulting AES volume-duration-fre-
quency (VDF) curves are plotted as solid lines in Fig. 20. For compari-
son, SEA VDF curves are shown as dashed lines on the same graph.
These were developed from the storm event record in which the extreme
annual volumes for durations less than t0 were determined. The mean
and standard deviation were computed for each set of extreme annual
storm volumes corresponding to a specific t0 value and a Type 1 extreme
value distribution was used to determine the storm event volumes for
different durations and return periods.
Comparing the two sets of VDF curves in Fig. 20, it is clear that, for
all durations, the volume from the SEA VDF curves is less than the vol-
ume from the AES VDF curves. In the AES analysis, the maximum vol-
ume in a given time period may be within a storm event or it may en-
compass more than one storm event since the value of t0 is selected
840

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 70 Return period (yrs)
A E S - T y p e VDF curves
60 S E A - T y p e VDF curves

50
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

4 6 8
DURATION (hrs)

FIG. 20.—AES and SEA Volume-Duration-Frequency Curves

arbitrarily. It is postulated that for larger values of t0, the AES and SEA
volumes should become similar for given frequencies.

INTENSITY-VOLUME-FREQUENCY ANALYSIS

In the AES type analysis, the volumes and intensities are computed
for arbitrary, fixed time periods; the intensities only differ from volumes
in that they are the quotient of the volume and the assumed fixed time
period. There would be no physical meaning to an intensity-volume-
frequency (IVF) curve developed from the AES type of analysis.
The IVF relationship can be examined by a storm event analysis. In
this case, the event definition, i > i0, v a v0, was used to determine the
extreme intensity-volume combinations. The IVF curves for a 60-minute
IET were obtained by the same procedure as outlined in the SEA IDF
analysis discussed previously, and are plotted in Fig. 21. It can be seen

SEA IVF curves

Return period (yrs.)

10
5
2

10 20 30 40 50 60
VOLUME (mm)

FIG. 21.—SEA Intensity-Volume-Frequency Curves

841

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 from this graph that for a given return period, larger volume storm events
all have approximately the same low average intensity.

VOLUME-FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The extreme annual volume series was determined from the storm
event analysis for each IET definition and using a Type 1 extreme value
distribution, the storm volumes for different return periods were ob-
tained and are plotted in Fig. 22 for different IET definitions.
The volume-frequency relationship may be examined in i-t space. Since
the product of intensity and duration yields a volume, an isovolume
curve is a rectangular hyperbola in i-t space. The frequency of this vol-
ume may be determined from Fig. 22. For example, the 68.8-mm (2.71-
in.) isovolume line has a return period of approximately 2 years for a
60-minute IET definition. The 2, 5, and 10-year return period isovolume
lines are plotted in Fig. 23 along with the SEA IDF curves reproduced
from Fig. 19. It is observed that the isovolume lines do not intersect the
SEA IDF curves of the same frequency. For a given duration and inten-
sity, the return period of the isovolume line is smaller than the return
period of the intensity-duration combination. This discrepancy is ex-
plained by the difference in statistical event definitions. Referring to Fig.
2(b), the probability of the event i > j„, f > t0 corresponds to region A ,
of the sample space, while the probability of the event v s v0 corre-
sponds to regions Ai + A2 + A3 of the sample space. Since Prob [v >
v0] includes Prob [i > i0, f > t„], as well as Prob [v > v0, t < t0] and
Prob [v £ v0, i 5: /„], it is expected that the volume of an event should
have a higher frequency than the intensity-duration of the same event.
It is interesting to compare these isovolume lines with the MWA IDF
curves plotted in Fig. 24. Unlike the previous case, the isovolume line
of a given return period intersects the MWA IDF curve of the same re-
turn period. The product of intensity and duration on the MWA IDF
curve is, by definition, monotonically increasing as duration increases.
For a fixed return period, the volume of the isovolume line is greater
than the product of i and t on the MWA IDF curve for durations less
than the intersection, while the volume is less than the product of i and
t for durations greater than the intersection. At the intersection, and

ol I I I I I d I I I I ol I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1
0 SO 40 00 SO 100 0 4 S 12 IB 20 24 20 02 30 40 44
RETURN PERIOD ( y t i ) DURATION l l v * ]

FIG. 22.—SEA Volume-Frequency FIG. 23.—SEA Isovolume and Inten-

Curves slty-Duration-Frequency Curves

842

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 IDF and SEA Isovolume Curves

SEA Isovolume curves

MWA IDF curves
Line of unique frequency
of the characteristics
Return period (yrs)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

v = 1 1 0 m m , T H = 10
v = 93.4mm,TR= 5
J8.8mm,TR=2

16 20 24
DURATION (hrs)

FIG. 24.—SEA Isovolume and MWA Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves

only at the intersection, the three characteristics have the same return
period. This point may be found for each return period and the collec-
tion of these points form a line of unique frequency of the characteristics, as
shown in Fig. 24.
The line of unique frequency of the characteristics provides a connec-
tion between the storm event analysis and the moving window analysis.
The MWA IDF curves are determined by finding the extreme annual
rainfall volumes for a fixed arbitrary duration. When the isovolume line
lies above the MWA IDF curve, storm volumes obtained from the IDF
curve are underestimated because the fixed duration is shorter than the
duration of storm events that produce extreme volumes. When the iso-
volume line lies below the MWA IDF curve, the design storm volumes
are overestimated because the fixed duration is long enough to encom-
pass more than one storm event. At the points of unique frequency, the
extreme volumes from the MWA are the same as the extreme volumes
obtained from the SEA because at those points the width of the moving
window equals the storm duration causing those volumes.
The location and slope of the line of unique frequency of the char-
acteristics in the i-t plane reflects the nature of the large volume storm
events. A line with a mild slope over long durations indicates that the
large volume events result from storm events with a low intensity and
long duration. This type of line was obtained with the Vancouver data
employed herein. A steeply sloped line over shorter durations would
indicate that extreme volume events result from short duration, high
intensity storms.

IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN

Engineers have a well-founded practical preference for concisely sum-

marized design data; hence, design tools such as IDF and VDF curves
have become popular. If the issue was simply which of the IDF and VDF
curves, those of the MWA type or those of the SEA type, is more ap-
propriate, then the answer would be that the MWA type curves are pref-
843

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 erable to the SEA type curves. This is true in the sense that from the
statistical event definitions used in the two types of analyses, the MWA
analysis produces more severe events than the SEA analysis. However,
the universal adoption of MWA IDF and MWA VDF curves for all urban
stormwater design applications would be a mistake because different en-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

gineered elements of the drainage system, such as transport, storage,

and treatment, are sensitive to different statistical events. This argument
is shown by considering two types of engineered elements: transport
(e.g., storm sewer pipe) and storage (e.g., stormwater reservoir).
If the MWA IDF curve is to be used for both pipe flow rate and res-
ervoir volume design, then it would be necessary to select an appro-
priate storm duration. Referring to Fig. 24, it is seen that the selected
duration greatly affects the volume determined from the IDF curve; shorter
durations underestimate the volume and longer durations overestimate
the volume. The IDF curve would thus appear to be an inappropriate
tool for reservoir volume design. Different tools (based on different sta-
tistical event definitions) are required for the design of different ele-
ments of the system.
If a storage reservoir is to be designed on the basis of the storm event
volume corresponding to a specified return period, then the storm vol-
ume-frequency curves obtained from the SEA analysis may be used. For
example, given a desired return period of 10 years and an IET definition
of 1 hour, the corresponding storm volume would be approximately 110
mm from Fig. 22. If this volume were obtained from the MWA IDF curve
in Fig.24, it would be found only at a storm duration of 29 hours. A 10-
year return period storm duration of less than 29 hours would under-
estimate the 10-year return period volume if it were taken from the IDF
curve.
Although a procedure for determining the storm volume from the vol-
ume-frequency curve would be an improvement over one which obtains
the storm volume from the IDF curve, it is still insufficient. A storage
reservoir has a controlled outflow (outflow not spilled), which may op-
erate both during and between storms. The existence of a controlled out-
flow requires that, in addition to storm volume, the storm duration and
interevent time (the time available before the next storm to reduce the
volume stored) must be considered. It is easily imagined that many com-
binations of volume, duration, and interevent time may result in spill
conditions. Moreover, the state of the reservoir (fullness) at the end of
the last storm event will affect the probability of spill in the current storm
event. Therefore, it is not possible to define a single event (i.e., a design
storm) that reflects the desired performance (frequency of spill, etc.) for
a storage reservoir. A continuous analysis rather than an event analysis
is required.
A representation of the continuous meteorological record is contained
in the probability density functions of the meteorological characteristics
produced by the storm event analysis. The PDFs of the rainfall charac-
teristics and the joint PDFs of combinations of rainfall characteristics re-
flect the entire meteorological data record. Thus, a joint PDF of volume,
duration, and interevent time would be appropriate to ascertain the per-
formance-frequency relationships for a storage reservoir by derived
probability distribution theory. Similar approaches have been advocated
844

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 by Chan and Bras (2), Howard (6), Schwarz (8), Schwarz and Adams
(9), and Smith (10). These approaches involve the derivation of PDFs of
system performance from the PDFs of meteorological characteristics. The
results are often closed-form mathematical solutions that provide sim-
ple, practical design tools. A more expensive and time-consuming al-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ternative is to employ continuous simulation models such as STORM

(11).

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This paper examines the frequency analysis of point rainfall data using
an 18-year data record from the city of Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada. Emphasis was placed on the distinction between the concepts
of meteorological and statistical events and on the precise definitions
and meaning of statistical events. Statistical events were defined by the
external characteristics (volume, duration, average intensity, and inter-
event time) of the storm events, and the nature of the statistical events
was graphically portrayed in volume-intensity-duration space. In order
to accommodate the various statistical event definitions, fundamentally
different types of analyses were required, i.e., the moving window anal-
ysis and the storm event analysis. The storm event analysis required a
definition of minimum interevent time to distinguish between separate
storm events. Statistics of storm event characteristics were calculated,
correlations between storm event characteristics were explored, and
probability density functions for storm event characteristics and com-
binations of characteristics were developed. It was concluded that for
practical purposes, the volume, duration, and intensity are all indepen-
dent of interevent time and that, within a storm event, volume and in-
tensity are independent. A slightly negative correlation was observed
between intensity and duration while a strong linear dependence was
observed between volume and duration.
Intensity-duration-frequency and volume-duration-frequency analyses
were performed by both the moving window analysis and the storm
event analysis. It was concluded that the moving window analysis pro-
duces more severe events because of the differences in statistical event
definitions employed. An intensity-volume-frequency analysis is not
meaningful with a moving window analysis, but was performed by a
storm event analysis.
Although the moving window analysis produces more severe inten-
sity-duration and volume-duration events than the storm event analysis,
the same is not true for simple volume events. An analysis of the fre-
quency of storm volumes demonstrated that event volumes derived from
moving window analysis intensity-duration-frequency curves cannot be
correctly ascribed the same frequency as that IDF curve. Such curves are
inappropriate for determining the return periods of rainfall event vol-
umes.
The final conclusion of this paper is that urban drainage system design
cannot, in general, be based on a single statistical event (i.e., design
storm). A drainage system is composed of different elements (transport,
storage, treatment), and since these elements are sensitive to different
statistical events or combinations of events, the different elements of the
845

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 system must be designed on the basis of different combinations of storm
characteristics. Moreover, any single design storm will almost invariably
contain characteristic values (volume, duration, and intensity) with dif-
ferent return periods.
This conclusion was shown by considering a drainage system that in-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

corporates storage into the design. The performance of a reservoir is

dependent on the volume, duration, and interevent time characteristics
of the meteorological input. The simultaneous consideration of these three
characteristics cannot be achieved by a single design storm but rather
requires representation of the continuous meteorology.
Continuous analysis has been most often accomplished in the past by
digital simulation with long-term meteorological records. The approach
allows a frequency analysis of system performance by generating a time
series of performance. Continuous simulation requires that the entire
record be analyzed for every change in a system configuration or its
operational parameters. Thus, optimization by continuous simulation is
expensive, time-consuming, and generally not achieved. An alternative
approach is provided by derived probability distribution theory, whereby
the probability density functions of meteorological characteristics are
mathematically transformed to create PDFs of system performance. The
resulting analytical models are often closed-form solutions that allow for
every compact, computationally simple analyses and are well suited for
optimization of drainage system design. The storm event analysis pre-
sented in this paper describes the required PDFs of meteorological char-
acteristics that facilitate this analytical approach to drainage systems de-
sign.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work upon which this paper is based was supported in large part
by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Additional support was provided by the University of Toronto. The writ-
ers also thank H. D. McConnell of the City of Vancouver Engineering
Department for making the Vancouver rainfall data available and Wil-
liam Hogg of the Atmospheric Environment Service, Downsview, On-
tario, for his assistance with rain gage stripcharts and for his comments
during various stages of this study.

APPENDIX I.—REFERENCES

1. "Analysis and Use of Urban Rainfall Data in Canada," Charles Howard and
Associates Limited, Report No. EPS 3-WP-79-4, Water Pollution Control Di-
rectorate, Environmental Protection Service, Environment Canada, July, 1979.
2. Chan, S.-O., and Bras, R. L., "Urban Stormwater Management: Distribution
of Flood Volumes," Water Resources Research, Vol. 15, No. 2, Apr., 1979, pp.
371-382.
3. DiToro, D. M., and Small, M. J., Discussion of "Theory of Storage and Treat-
ment-Plant Overflows," by C. D. D. Howard, Journal of the Environmental
Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, No. EE3, June, 1977, pp. 517-520.
4. Eagleson, P. S., "Dynamics of Flood Frequency," Water Resources Research,
Vol. 8, No. 4, Aug., 1972, pp. 878-897.
5. Fraser, H. G., "Frequency of Storm Characteristics: Analysis and Implica-
tions for Volume Design," thesis presented to the University of Toronto,
846

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 Toronto, Ontario, Canada, in 1982, in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Applied Science.
6. Howard, C. D. D., "Theory of Storage and Treatment-Plant Overflows," Journal
of the Environmental Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, No. EE4, Aug., 1976,
pp. 709-722.
7. Restrepo-Posada, P. J., and Eagleson, P. S., "Identification of Independent
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Rainstorms," Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 55, 1982, pp. 303-319.

8. Schwarz, R. B., "Distributed Storage for Urban Stormwater Control: An An-
alytical Model with Economic Optimization," thesis presented to the Uni-
versity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, in 1980, in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science.
9. Schwarz, R. B., and Adams, B. J., "Distributed Storage for Urban Runoff
Control," Proceedings, Second International Conference on Urban Storm
Drainage, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111., June, 1981, pp. 360-369.
10. Smith, D. I., "Probability of Storage Overflows for Stormwater Manage-
ment," thesis presented to the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Can-
ada, in 1980, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Mas-
ter of Applied Science.
11. "Urban Storm Water Runoff," STORM, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hy-
drologic Engineering Center, Davis, Calif., 723-58-L2520, May, 1974.
12. Yen, B. C , Discussion of "Theory of Storage and Treatment-Plant Over-
flows," by C. D. D. Howard, Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division,
ASCE, Vol. 103, No. EE3, June, 1977, pp. 514-517.

APPENDIX II.—NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

AES = Atmospheric Environment Service of Environment

Canada;
Alt • • •, A(, = regions in sample space;
B = r a n d o m variable of rainfall interevent time;
b = rainfall interevent time;
fxix) = probability density function of r a n d o m variable X;
fxA*>y) = joint probability density function of r a n d o m variables
X a n d Y;
IDF = intensity duration frequency;
IET = interevent time;
IVF = intensity volume frequency;
I = r a n d o m variable of average rainfall intensity;
i = average rainfall intensity;
K0( ) = modified Bessel function of first kind, first order;
MWA = moving w i n d o w analysis;
PDF = probability density function;
SEA = storm event analysis;
s = standard deviation;
T = r a n d o m variable of rainfall duration;
t = rainfall duration;
VDF = volume duration frequency;
V = r a n d o m variable of rainfall volume;
v = rainfall volume;
x = m e a n value of r a n d o m variable X;
P = parameter for exponential PDF of average rainfall in-
tensity;

847

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.

 T( ) = gamma function;
£ = parameter for exponential PDF of rainfall volume;
\ = parameter for exponential PDF of rainfall duration;
and
i|i = parameter for exponential PDF of rainfall interevent
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MARRIOTT LIB-UNIV OF UT on 10/13/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

time.

J. Environ. Eng. 1986.112:827-848.