Session 4

Runoff-Hydrograph Transformation

E1

1. Identification of the unit hydrograph QHU

1.1 Since the data are sampled over time ∆𝑡 = 5𝑚𝑛t the simplest choice is to take the unit
rainfall over time : 𝑡𝑟 = ∆𝑡 = 5𝑚𝑛
And as intensity, we will take 𝐼𝑢 = 1⁄𝑡𝑟 = 0.2 𝑚𝑚/𝑚𝑖𝑛. In this way, the water depth over
the duration of the unit hyetogram is 1 mm.

1.2 All hyetograph and hydrograph will be discretized on the time step t r (in the sense of the
average intensity and average flow between [t-tr ,t])

The scale factor is the 𝛼𝑘 ratio of the average rainfall intensity I(tk) over the interval [t k-1,
tk] and 𝐼𝑢

𝐼(𝑡𝑘 ) 1 𝑡
𝛼𝑘 = with 𝐼(𝑡𝑘 ) = ∆𝑡 ∫𝑡 𝑘 𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝜏)𝑑𝜏
𝐼𝑢 𝑘−1

With 𝐼𝑢 = 1⁄∆𝑡 (mm/mn)

𝑡
Therefore 𝛼𝑘 = ∫𝑡 𝑘 𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝜏)𝑑𝜏
𝑘−1

Applying the trapezoid method, the value of the scale factor is given by:

𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝑡𝑘 ) + 𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝑡𝑘−1 )

𝛼𝑘 = × ∆𝑡
2

1.3 In the same way, we will reason in terms of average flow measured on the time step t k

𝑄𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝑡𝑘 ) + 𝑄𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 (𝑡𝑘−1 )

𝑄𝑘 = × ∆𝑡
2

1.4 We apply the recurrence relation:

𝑘=𝑗
𝑄𝑗 ≈ ∑ 𝛼𝑘 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑗+1−𝑘
𝑘=1
 At the first time step j=1:

𝑄1 = 𝛼1 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 1 so 𝑄𝐻𝑈1 = 𝑄1⁄𝛼1

At the second time step j=2:

𝑄2 = 𝛼1 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 2 + 𝛼2 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 1 so 𝑄𝐻𝑈2 = (𝑄2 − 𝛼2 𝑄𝐻𝑈1 )⁄𝛼1

Generalization:
𝑘=𝑗
𝑄𝑗 = 𝛼1 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑗 + ∑ 𝛼𝑘 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑗+1−𝑘
𝑘=2

so:

𝑘=𝑗
𝑄𝐻𝑈𝑗 = (𝑄𝑗 − ∑ 𝛼𝑘 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑗+1−𝑘 )⁄𝛼1
𝑘=2

The results of the Excel file (and Table 1) were obtained from a Python program in order
to have the results quickly. If you do this in Excel, manually, you can check the first 5
iterations. I left the recurrence formula explicitly in the file. If you are proficient in Excel
macros, you can also program the formula directly in a macro...

2- Calculation of a hydrograph

2.1 The discrete convolution formula is applied:

𝑘=𝑗
𝑄𝑗 ≈ ∑ 𝛼𝑘 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑗+1−𝑘
𝑘=1

For j=1 : 𝑄1 = 𝛼1 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 1

For j=2 : 𝑄2 = 𝛼1 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 2 + 𝛼2 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 1

For any j : 𝑄𝑗 = 𝛼1 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑛 + 𝛼2 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 𝑛−1 + ⋯ . +𝛼𝑗 × 𝑄𝐻𝑈 1

Again, I programmed the calculation on Python to give the results of the Excel file and table
You can manually check the results by taking a few iterations

Be careful to 𝛼𝑘 , as in question 1, it is necessary to calculate the average of the intensity of

triangular rain imeasured(t) on the intervals [t k-1,t k] , values of imeasured(t) beeing sampled every 5
minutes on the continuous rain given by the formula:

𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑥 × 𝑡
𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑟é (𝑡) = 𝑠𝑖 𝑡 ≤ 𝑡𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒
𝑡𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒
𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑥 × 𝑡
𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑟é (𝑡) = − + 2𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑠𝑖 𝑡𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒 < 𝑡 ≤ 𝑑𝑢𝑟é𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑒
𝑡𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒

2.2- Simply apply the recurrence formula:

∆𝑡 ∆𝑡
𝑄(𝑖∆𝑡) = 𝑒 − 𝐾 𝑄([𝑖 − 1]∆𝑡) + A. 𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 (𝑡)(1 − 𝑒 − 𝐾 )

As the flow rates are given in m3/min and the rain in mm/min, be careful with the unit
conversion (change the rain to m/min and A to m2).

If you plot both hydrographs, you will see a slight shift. Indeed, the recurrence formula is
demonstrated by assuming the constant flow rate on [tk-1 ,tk] and equal to Q(t k). To compare
the two hydrographs, given the implementation of the convolution method, it is necessary to
discretize the hydrograph obtained by the linear reservoir method by taking the average of
the flow between [tk-dt, tk]

We then find that in this mode of representation, both methods give the same result (which
is expected given the content of the exercise and the way I generated the data).
Appendices of exercise E1 solution (see also Excel file)

Table 1: Data and results Question 1

Table 2: Calculation of hydrographs by convolution of the unit hydrograph or application of
the linear reservoir model

Figure 2 : Representation of the hydrographs obtained by the 2 methods.

E2

1- Calculate the hydrograph generated by this rain using the semi-empirical model based on
a storage equation and a flow equation (Manning-Strikler):

𝑑ℎ
𝐴 = 𝐴𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒 (𝑡) − 𝑄(𝑡)
𝑑𝑡

𝑊 √𝑠0
𝑄(𝑡) = (ℎ − 𝑑𝑝 )5/3
𝑛

Unlike the slides, in order to be able to solve the problem simply, we will take a totally
explicit discretization scheme :

At the time step t=tj we write:

𝑊 √𝑠0 5
𝑄𝑗 = ℎ𝑗 3
𝑛
ℎ𝑗+1 − ℎ𝑗
𝐴 = 𝐴𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 (𝑡𝑗+1 ) − 𝑄𝑗
∆𝑡

Nb: I took the rain at time td+1 because it is known.

Hence the explicit system to be solved:

ℎ𝑗+1 − ℎ𝑗 𝑊√𝑠0 5
ℎ𝑗+1 = 𝐴 = [𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 (𝑡𝑗+1 ) − ℎ 3 ] ∆𝑡 + ℎ𝑗
∆𝑡 𝑛𝐴 𝑗

𝑊 √𝑠0 5
𝑄𝑗 = ℎ𝑗 3
𝑛

With W=2xL and M=L/A1/2=0.45. We find L=100.62 m which I have rounded to 101 m

To avoid mistakes, I put everything in S.I units to use Manning-Stricklerwith the correct units
(Q : m 3/s, ieffective : m/s, h j : m , t : s). Do the calculation over a time of more than 60 minutes to
get the complete hydrograph. The results are shown in the following table and figure
 Table 1: Solving the System of Equations Figure 2: Hyetoramma and resulting
hydrograph

2- It is desired to compare the results obtained with the linear reservoir model, which
has a single parameter K.

- Estimate the value of the parameter K so that the 2 methods can be compared.
- Calculate the hydrograph from the linear reservoir model

By definition, K=t2 – t1 is the time separating the barycenter t1 from the hyetograph and t2
from the hydrograph. To compare the 2 models, we will estimate K from the previous
results.

The barycenter is given by:

∫ 𝜏𝑓(𝜏)𝑑𝜏
𝑡=
∫ 𝑓(𝜏)𝑑𝜏

where f(t) is the effective rain i (t) or the flow Q(t)

In fact, t1 for rain triangle is easy to find (t1=60/2=30 min).

All that remains is to calculate t2 by discretizing the above integrals for the flow rate (trapezoid
method for example). For the text data, we find K=25 minutes approximatively.
Once K is known, the flow rate is calculated using the linear reservoir method by applying the
recurrence relation:

∆𝑡 ∆𝑡
𝑄𝑗+1 = 𝑒 − 𝐾 𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒 (𝑡𝑗+1 ) + (1 − 𝑒 − 𝐾 ) 𝑄𝑗

Table 2: Calculation of t2. NB we Table 3: Results of the linear reservoir method (last
can see on table 3 that the flow column)
rate is not yet quite zero over the
range of time. For more
precision,calculate the
hydrograph over a longer period
of time
 Figure 3: Hydrograph given by the 2 models

Well, it works quite well (knowing the uncertainties due to discretization)

3- Perform a sensitivity test by varying the parameters n, s0 and W. How does this
translate to the value of K. Does the linear reservoir model always give comparable
results??? Conclude.

I'm not going to be exhaustive on this answer. You can use the Excel file attached to the
solution. Here are a few examples. All other things being equal, I changed the slope
(s0=10%) which corresponds to accelerating the flow (K goes from 25 minutes to about 10
minutes, which corresponds to the expected behavior) and to increase the peak flows.
Similarly, all other things being equal, I have increased the Manning coefficient (n=0.1)
which corresponds to an increased friction: the water depth must be then larger and the
flows must be slowed down (which corresponds here to K=42 minutes in this case), with a
lower peak flow. The 3 hydrographs are shown in Figure 4.

I made a final case by taking an aspect ratio M=2 (which has the effect of increasing L and
increasing the aspect ratio of length to width of the watershed. One would expect that
increasing L would increase the response time of the watershed since there is more
distance to travel to get to the outlet. But:
- As written, the model assumes that the flow Q(t) from the runoff on the BV is the one
found directly at the outlet (so we don't really take into account the transfer time at
the outlet along the hydraulic path in the L direction)
- Here, the run-off is supposed to occur in the direction perpendicular to L. The larger the
value of L, the larger the wetted area, so the higher the flow rate is in the Manning-
Strickler formulation (for the same net rain) (and the runoff, for the same surface area,
is over a shorter distance (widthwise): this lead to a diminution of K (K=7 mn
approximately)

Figure 4: Behaviour of the semi-mechanistic model as a function of slope, friction and watershed
elongation parameters.

For the above 4 sets of parameters, the results of the linear reservoir model are also
represented
 n=0.04 s0=0.01 M=0.45 n=0.04 s0=0.1 M=0.45

n=0.1 s0=0.01 M=0.45 n=0.04 s0=0.01 M=2

Figure 5: Comparison of the linear reservoir model and the semi-mechanistic model.

The reservoir model has a slightly more immediate response than the semi-mechanistic
model and depending on the parameters used, the peak flows are overestimated or
underestimated. The differences observed are of the order of 15% at most in the range of
parameters studied.

Otherwise, hydrographs,in terms of damping in relation to net rainfall, have roughly the
same shape. In the end, the linear reservoir model gives relatively comparable results to
this semi-mechanistic model insofar as the K parameter gives a good account of the effects
of friction, slope and other parameters that intervene in the semi-mechanistic model.