Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117

www.elsevier.com/locate/jher

Graphical estimation of detention pond volume

for rainfall of short duration
Yao-Ming Hong*
Department of Environment and Disaster Management, MingDao University, 369 Wen-Hwa Road, Peetow, Changhua 52345, Taiwan, ROC
Received 15 May 2007; revised 24 June 2008; accepted 26 June 2008

Abstract

This study uses the hydrological continuity equation to establish a numerical model according to the detention pond routing phenomena.
Then the numerical model is used to develop a series of charts using the dimensionless equation and simplification procedure. These charts can
be used to calculate the maximum detention volume by giving characteristics of detention pond shapes, outflow device and triangular inflow
hydrograph. A series of examples are adopted to illustrate the procedure of graphical estimation. Based on the examples presented in this paper,
the detention volume difference between that estimated from the charting methodology and that generated from the numerical model is within
3%. These charts are useful for determining the needed parameters for detention pond design with inflow hydrographs, detention pond
configurations, and outflow devices.
Ó 2008 International Association for Hydraulic Engineering and Research, Asia Pacific Division. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: hydrological continuity equation; numerical model; graphical estimation; detention volume

1. Introduction of water passing through detention pond. Below is a summary

The decline of vegetation cover and the spread of impress-
ible areas due to urban development decrease rainwater infil-
trations and increases runoff volumes. Runoff upsurges may
cause frequent flooding and severe downstream sediment
washout. To avoid such adverse effects in new communities,
detention facilities that reduce peak flow and control the
streamline as well as sediment outflow rate become necessary.
A common problem in detention basin design is the esti-
mation of its volume. To resolve this problem, several
simplified methods used to estimate detention pond volumes
are established by Abt and Grigg (1978), Burton (1980),
Donahue and McCuen (1981), Chow et al. (1988), Guo (1999)
and Hong et al. (2006). However, the hydraulic routing is
necessary if we want to simulate the hydrograph drainage from
the outlet and to determine the size of outflow device. Most of
these studies use the continuity equation to model the process
* Tel.: þ886 4 8876660x8614; fax: þ886 4 8886927.
E-mail address: blueway@mdu.edu.tw
of various methodologies, inflow hydrographs, and detention
pond types used in these studies:
(a) Inflow hydrographs: Five inflow hydrographs, triangular
inflow hydrograph (Basha 1995), trapezoidal inflow
hydrograph (Donahue and McCuen 1981; Burton 1980;
Guo 1999), dimensionless inflow hydrograph (Mockus
1957; Akan 1989; Akan 1990; Akan 1994), instantaneous
unit hydrograph (IUH) (Kessler and Diskin 1991; McE-
nore 1992), characteristic curves (HEC 1980) and hydro-
graph procedure (Urban 2001; Guo 2004), have been used.
Among these, triangular inflow hydrograph can specifi-
cally represent the relationship between peak inflow and
recession time for short duration (Hong et al. 2006).
(b) Detention pond types: There are two detention pond type
features. One uses two parameters (Horn 1987; Akan
1989; Akan 1990; Akan 1994; Basha 1995) to calculate
the relationship between water surface area and depth, and
the other uses three parameters (McEnore 1992). In
general, three parameters could describe most of the man-
made or real detention pond type feature (Hong 2002).

1570-6443/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 International Association for Hydraulic Engineering and Research, Asia Pacific Division. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jher.2008.06.003
110 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117

(c) Numerical solution: The continuity equation has been the runoff drops gradually to zero. Consider a triangular inflow
solved via two approaches. One is finite different scheme hydrograph:
(Horn 1987; Akan 1989; Akan 1990), fourth-order Runge-  
t  
Kutta scheme (McEnore 1992); and perturbation scheme I ¼ Ip 0  t < tp ð2aÞ
(Basha 1995; Chen and Hong 2002). In general, the tp
fourth-order Runge-Kutta scheme provides more accurate  
estimate (McEnore 1992). 1 t  
I ¼ Ip 1þ  tp  t < tp þ tr ð2bÞ
b btp
Is there a more straightforward answer to determine
detention facility design parameters? This study aims to where Ip ¼ peak inflow rate; tp ¼ time between runoff begin-
provide a method that will reduce the need for intensive ning and runoff peak; tr ¼ time of recession; b ¼ tr =tp is
engineering calculation. a characteristic of inflow hydrograph.
Based on the dimensionless equation and the simplification
procedure, this study develops a numerical model to establish 2.1.2. The discharge equation of outflow device
a graphic estimation method for the design of detention facilities The flood volume Vf is
in urban area. The model uses the fourth-order Runge-Kutta  
method to solve the continuity equation with triangular inflow 1þb
Vf ¼ Ip tp ð3Þ
hydrograph. In addition, the model adds base flow to the equation 2
of detention pond type feature for more general application. The
resulted charts are useful for determining necessary parameters The discharge equation of outflow device of detention
for detention pond design with different triangular inflow pond is
hydrographs, detention pond configurations and outflow devices. O ¼ K1 hn ð4Þ

2. Detention pond routing equations in which h ¼ stage in detention pond above spillway crest; K1
and n are constants of the outlet device. pffiffiffiffiffi
2.1. Governing equation In a rectangular sharp-crested weir: K1 ¼ ð2=3ÞCd 2gbc
and n ¼ 1.5 (Bos 1989), where Cd ¼ 0.6, discharge coefficient;
The equation of continuity that represents the difference bc ¼ breadth at bottom of control section; g ¼ 9.81 m/s2,
between inflow and outflow discharge (which equals to the gravitational acceleration. pffiffiffiffiffi
variation rate of detention volume) of a detention pond is When a rectangular culvert is selected, K1 ¼ Cd bc D 2g
(Chow et al. 1988) and n ¼ 0.5, where D ¼ height of culvert.
The water surface area, A, is defined in term of storage
dS volume S and stage h as
¼IO ð1Þ
dt
dS
where t ¼ time; S ¼ storage volume of water in the detention A¼ ð5aÞ
dh
pond above an arbitrary datum; I ¼ inflow discharge;
O ¼ outflow discharge. Thus, the relationship between A and stage above the
spillway crest can be derived:
2.1.1. Inflow hydrograph selection dS
Soil Conservation Service (SCS 1972) developed a triangular ¼ A ¼ K2 hm ð5bÞ
dh
hydrograph which is based on empirical observation. Hong et al.
(2006) assumed constant rainfall intensity in time and space to where K2 and m are empirical constants (Butler 1982).
derive a triangular inflow hydrograph with short rainfall dura- The typical value of coefficient m is between 1 and 2
tion and a trapezoidal inflow hydrograph with long rainfall (McEnore 1992), depending on the shape of the detention
duration. He used the example of Guo (1999) to explain the pond as well as the slopes of the pond’s sides and bottom. For
determination procedure of detention storage volume, and a detention pond with vertical walls and the horizontal bottom,
obtained the maximum detention storage volume by triangular A ¼ K2 and m ¼ 0.
inflow hydrograph and triangular outflow hydrograph. In addi- Integrate Eq. (5b) to yield the stage-storage function:
tion, the technical Specification of Soil and Water Conservation
(Taiwan Soil and Water Conservation Bureau 2002) adopts the Zh
K2 mþ1
triangle as the inflow hydrograph of detention pond. Based on S¼ K2 hm dh ¼ h ð6Þ
mþ1
above reasons, this study uses triangular inflow hydrograph as 0
the inflow hydrograph.
In a short rainfall duration, the runoff increases until Re-organize Eq. (6) to express h in term of storage, S:
reaching a maximum at the time of peak inflow tp when
1=ðmþ1Þ
rainfall duration td equals to the concentration time tc . After td, h ¼ ½Sðm þ 1Þ=K2  ð7Þ
 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117 111

Substituting Eq. (7) into Eq. (4) to obtain: 3. The graphic estimation method
n=ðmþ1Þ
O ¼ K1 ½Sðm þ 1Þ=K2  ð8Þ This section demonstrates the details for establishing two
graphic estimation methods of detention pond volume.

2.2. Governing equation in dimensionless form 3.1. Graphic estimation method of specified
detention pond
Combine Eqs. (1), (2) and (8) to derive the governing
equation for flood routing through a detention pond: Eq. (11) is a general dimensionless form describing the
stage-storage relationship. For a detention pond with a vertical
   n=ðmþ1Þ
dS t Sðm þ 1Þ   wall and horizontal bottom, A ¼ K2 and m ¼ 0 via Eq. (5b).
¼ Ip  K1 0  t < tp ð9aÞ Eqs. (6)e(8) and (11) can be simplified as:
dt tp K2

   n=ðmþ1Þ S ¼ K2 h ð13aÞ
dS 1 t Sðm þ 1Þ  
¼ Ip 1 þ   K1 tp  t < tp þ tr S
dt b btp K2 h¼ ð13bÞ
ð9bÞ K2
 n
The initial condition is S ¼ 0 at t ¼ 0. S
The maximum detention volume Sf can be obtained via O ¼ K1 ð13cÞ
K2
integrating Eq. (9), while the maximum outflow discharge Op
can be obtained via substituting S with Sf in Eq. (8). dS h  i.1 þ b
 1=n
The governing equations can be non-dimensionalized by ¼ t  K$ðS Þ ð0  t < 1Þ ð14aÞ
dt 2
introducing the following dimensionless parameters:
 
t dS 1 t 1=n 1þb
t ¼ ð10aÞ ¼ 1 þ   K$ðS Þ ð1  t < 1 þ bÞ
tp dt b b 2
ð14bÞ
S Soil Conservation Service (SCS 1986) adopted a dimen-
S ¼ ð10bÞ
Vf sionless unit hydrograph (Mockus 1957) which was derived
from a large number of natural unit hydrographs from water-
O sheds varying widely in size and geographical locations. SCS
O ¼ ð10cÞ
Ip (1986) also developed an equivalent triangular hydrograph to
simulate the dimensionless unit hydrograph. The b calculated
 n=ðmþ1Þ by SCS is 1.67. Taiwan Provincial Government Water
K1 Vf ðm þ 1Þ
K¼ ð10dÞ Resources Department (TPGWRD 1993) selected many unit
Ip K2 hydrographs from 42 watersheds to develop its native
Eq. (9) can then be expressed in dimensionless form: dimensionless unit hydrograph with b equals 2.277.
By using n ¼ 1.5/0.5 for the weir/culvert outlets and
dS n  o.1 þ b b ¼ 1.67/2.277 for the inflow hydrograph, the relationship
 n=mþ1
¼ t  KðS Þ ð0  t < 1Þ ð11aÞ
dt 2 between Sf/Vf and Op/Ip can be described by four curves shown
in Fig. 1, which in turn, can be used to calculate the detention
  volume of specified detention pond.
dS 1 t 1þb
¼ 1 þ   KðS Þn=ðmþ1Þ ð1  t < 1 þ bÞ
dt b b 2
3.2. Graphic estimation method of general
ð11bÞ detention pond
The initial condition becomes S* ¼ 0 at t* ¼ 0.
The function of outflow discharge-detention volume in Let a ¼ (mþ1)/n be a ‘‘nonlinear storage reservoir’’ (Horn
dimensionless form is: 1987) and rewrite Eq. (11) as

O ¼ KS ð12Þ dS h  i.1 þ b

 1=a
¼ t  K$ðS Þ ð0  t < 1Þ ð15aÞ
This study develops a computer program to solve above dt 2
equation, which uses a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method to
solve Eq. (11) for a series of S*’s. Once the maximum S* is  
dS 1 t 1þb
identified, Sf can be obtained via Eq. (10b), maximum Op ¼ 1 þ   K$ðS Þ1=a ð1  t < 1 þ bÞ
dt b b 2
via Eqs. (12) and (10c), and maximum water stage hf via
Eq. (7). ð15bÞ
112 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117

1 (1) If a and Op/Ip are constants, a greater b will cause

a smaller Sf/Vf.
0.9
(2) If b and Op/Ip are constants, a greater a will results in
0.8 a smaller Sf/Vf.

0.7 Fig. 2 displays the relationship between Sf/Vf and Op/Ip for
b ¼ 1 and an assortment of a. With constant Op/Ip, let Da be
0.6
the vertical Sf/Vf distance between a ¼ 0.6667 and other
Sf / Vf

n=1.5, β=1.67
0.5 a curves, da be the vertical Sf/Vf distance between any two
n=1.5, β=2.277 nearest curves. Due to the judicious choice of a, all da are all
0.4 equal.
n=0.5, β=1.67 Fig. 3a and b shows the relationship between b and da for
0.3
n=0.5, β=2.277 Op/Ip ¼ 0.01 w 0.97. The two figures illustrate that a greater
0.2 b would cause a smaller da. da can be obtained from Fig. 3
once b and Op/Ip are determined. A maximum value of b ¼ 6
0.1 is chosen as da approaches a constant as b approaches 6.
Fig. 4a and b demonstrates the relationship between Da and
0
a. At b ¼ 1 and with specific a and Op/Ip, Da can be obtained.
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Op/ Ip
a 0.026
Fig. 1. Relationship between Sf/Vf and Op/Ip for Z0 ¼ 0, m ¼ 0 and constant b.
0.024
0.022
Combining (8) and (10d): 0.020
 a 0.018 0.55
O p Sf 0.50 0.45
K¼ ð16Þ 0.016 0.40
Ip Vf 0.35
0.014 0.30
dα

Combining Eqs. (15) and (16): 0.25

0.012
  0.20
Sf Op 0.010
¼f ; a; b ð17Þ 0.15
Vf Ip 0.008
0.006 0.10
Sf/Vf is available as long as a, b and Op/Ip are defined. 0.004
McEnore (1992) reached the following conclusions about op/ip=0.05
0.002
the relationship among Sf/Vf, a, b and Op/Ip: 0.000
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
1 β

b 0.026

0.024
0.8
D 0.022

0.020

0.6 d 0.018 0.55

0.60
Sf / Vf

0.016 0.65
0.70
0.014 0.75
dα

0.4 0.012 0.80

0.010 0.85

0.008 0.90
0.2
0.006
op/ip=0.95
0.004

0.002
0
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 β
Op/ Ip
Fig. 3. (a) Relationship between da and b for Op/Ip ¼ 0.01 w 0.55. (b) Rela-
Fig. 2. Relationship between Op/Ip and Sf/Vf for b ¼ 1 and different a. tionship between da and b for Op/Ip ¼ 0.55 w 0.97.
 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117 113

0.93 1.35 1.000

a 0.26
0.781.12 1.67 2.1 2.7 3.5 4.7
0.60 0.55
Op/Ip=0.05
0.900
0.50 0.10
0.24 0.45
0.800 0.15
0.40
0.22 0.20
0.35 0.25
0.20 0.700
0.30 0.30
0.18 0.600 0.35
0.25 0.40

Sf /Vf
0.16
0.500 0.45
0.14 0.20 0.50
Dα

0.12 0.400 0.55

0.15 0.60
0.10 0.300 0.65
0.70
0.08 0.10 0.75
0.200
0.80
0.06
0.85
0.100 0.90
0.04 Op/Ip=0.05
0.95
0.02 0.000

0.00 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 β
α
1.000
b 0.93 1.35
0.781.12 1.67 2.1 2.7 3.5 4.7 0.900
Op/Ip=0.05
0.26 0.60 0.65 0.10
0.70 0.15
0.24 0.800
0.75
0.22 0.20
0.80 0.700
0.25
0.20
0.85 0.600 0.30
0.18 0.35
Sf / Vf

0.16 0.500 0.40

0.90 0.45
0.14 0.400
Dα

0.50
0.12 0.55
0.300 0.60
0.10 0.65
Op/Ip=0.95 0.200 0.70
0.08 0.75
0.80
0.06 0.100 0.85
0.90
0.04 0.95
0.000
0.02 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
0.00 β
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
α Fig. 5. (a) Relationship between b and Sf/Vf for a ¼ 0.6667 and Op/
Ip ¼ 0.01 w 0.97. (b) Relationship between b and Sf/Vf for a ¼ 1.67 and Op/
Fig. 4. (a) Relationship between Da and a for Op/Ip ¼ 0.01 w 0.60. (b) Ip ¼ 0.01 w 0.97.
Relationship between Da and a for Op/Ip ¼ 0.60 w 0.97.
¼ (33.75  60  60)/2 ¼ 60 750 m3. Various graphic routing
methods are displayed as follows.
The maximum value of a is 7 as Da is approximately
a constant at a ¼ 7. 4.1. Simplified graphic routing method
Fig. 5a and b exhibits the relationship between b and Sf/Vf
for Op/Ip ¼ 0.01 w 0.97, a ¼ 0.6667, and 1.67. Fig. 5 shows Assume the detention pond has vertical side slopes and
that Sf/Vf is near a constant when b ¼ 6. a rectangular shaped, leveled bottom of 100 by 200 m2, via Eq.
(13a) m ¼ 0, K2 ¼ 20 000.
There are four possible combinations based on Fig. 1:
4. Application of graphic estimation method
Case A. b ¼ 2.277 and n ¼ 0.5
The example used to verify this study is the detention pond
located in the Central Taiwan Science Park (CTSP) of This case adopts TPGWRD’s b and culvert as the outflow
Taichung, Taiwan. The watershed of CTSP has a drainage area device.
of 74.69 ha and a flood time of 60 min. With the maximum
inflow of the designated pond (ip ¼ 33.75 cm) and the permis- Step 1. Calculate the maximum storage detention volume.
sible release from the developed watershed (op ¼ 11.19 cm), From Fig. 1, Sf/Vf ¼ 0.58 for Op/Ip ¼ 0.332; then
we obtain op/ip ¼ 0.332, and runoff volume Vf ¼ (ip/tb)/2 Sf ¼ Vf  0.58 ¼ 35 253 m3.
114 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117

Table 1
Comparison of Sf/Vf between graphical and numerical method
Case no. Design condition Maximum storage volume (m3) Relative error R (%), (a  b)/b
Inflow Outflow device Shape characters of Graph Numerical
hydrograph, b character, n detention pond estimation (a) calculation (b)
K2 K2
A 2.277 0.5 20 000 0 35 253 35 506 0.71
B 1.67 0.5 20 000 0 36 146 36 103 0.12
C 2.277 1.5 20 000 0 40 399 41 227 2.01
D 1.67 1.5 20 000 0 41 310 42 064 1.79
E1 2.277 0.5 6530 1.613 30 375 31 434 4.14
E2 2.277 0.5 6530 1.613 32 437 31 434 3.09

Step 2. Derive the maximum water depth from Eq. (13b).
the maximum water depth hf ¼ 35 253/20 000 ¼ 1.762 m.
Step 3. Determine the size of outflow device from Eq.
(13c).
K1 ¼ Op =hf n ¼ 11:19=1:7620:5 ¼ 8:431:
For a rectangularpculvert,
ffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
bc D ¼ K1 =ðCd 2gÞ ¼ 8:431=ð0:6  2  9:81Þ ¼
3:172 m2 , where Cd ¼ 0.6, g ¼ 9.81 m/s2, bc and D can be
chosen by designer (e.g. D ¼ 1 m when bc ¼ 3.172 m).
In reality the values of bc and D are governed by the
available standard sizes of the outfall structures. Not to exceed
the allowable outflow rate, we choose the next smaller size
(probably 1 m by 3 m in this case). However, this change will
require a larger storage volume than the value calculated by
step1. We can add some freeboard in the pond to account for
errors like this, or calculate the storage volume again as
following. pffiffiffiffiffi
Using D ¼ 1pm and bc ¼ 3, we obtain K1 ¼ Cd bc D 2g ¼
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0:6  1  3  2  9:81 ¼ 7:973, and hf ¼ Op/K1 ¼ (11.19/
7.973)1/0.5 ¼ 1.97 m. Finally, the storage volume
Sf ¼ hf  K2 ¼ 39 396 m3.
The predicted storage volume for various a and b (Cases A,
B, C, D, E1, E2) are compared in Table 1 and further discussed
m ¼ 1:613; K2 ¼ 6530; and a ¼ ðm þ 1Þ=n
¼ ð1:613 þ 1Þ=0:5 ¼ 5:226:
Fig. 7 shows the steps to calculate the maximum storage
volume of case E. The procedure of general graphic routing
method is summarized as follows:
Case E. b ¼ 2.277 and n ¼ 0.5
Step 1. Based on Fig. 5b, [Sf/Vf] ¼ 0.59 for a0 ¼ 1.67,
b ¼ 2.277 and Op/Ip ¼ 0.332.
There are two methods to calculate the storage volume: one
is the simple linear interpolation, and the other is the accurate
graphic method.
4.2.1. Case E1: linear interpolation method
If the linear interpolation is used, we assume that
(Sf/Vf)a¼5.226, b¼2.277 ¼ ((Sf/Vf)a¼5.226, b¼1/(Sf/Vf)a¼1.67, b¼1) 
(Sf/Vf)a¼1.67, b¼2.277. From Fig. 2, we obtain (Sf/Vf)a¼5.226,
3
b¼2.277 ¼ 0.53/0.63 ¼ 0.496 and Sf ¼ 30 375 m .
100000
measured volume
80000 best-fit
storage volume (m3)

in Section 4.3. 60000

Sf =6530h1.613
4.2. General graphic routing method
40000
In preliminary design stage, the storage volume can be
obtained via triangular inflow/outflow where b ¼ 1 (Taiwan
Soil and Water Conservation Bureau 2002).
The detention storage volume is 20000

 
t b i p  op 60  60  ð33:75  11:19Þ
sf ¼ ¼ ¼ 40608 m3
2 2 0

For the detention pond and the rectangular culvert that 0 1 2 3 4 5

CSTP constructed, the relationship between detention volume Water depth (m)
and water depth can be calculated from Fig. 6 via nonlinear Fig. 6. Relationship between storage volume and water depth for CTSP
regression: project.
 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117 115

a 1.000 c 0.026
Op/Ip=0.05 0.024
0.900
0.10
0.022
0.800 0.15
0.020
0.20
0.700 0.018 0.60
0.25 0.50 0.55
0.600 ]]
Vf
Sf
=0.59 0.30
0.35
0.176
0.016
0.40 0.45
0.35
0.30
Sf / Vf

0 0.014

dα
0.500 0.40 0.25
0.45 0.012
0.20
0.400 0.50 0.010
0.55 0.15
0.300 0.60 0.008
0.65 0.006 0.10
0.200 0.70
0.75 0.004
0.80 Op/ Ip = 0.05
0.100 0.85
0.90 0.002
0.95
0.000 0.000
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
β β

0.93 1.35
b 0.26
0.78 1.12 1.67 2.1 2.7 3.5 4.7
0.60 0.55
d 1
0.50
0.24 0.45
0.40
0.22
0.35 0.8
0.204 0.20 Dα
0.30
0.185 0.18
0.178 0.16 0.25 dα α=0.6667
0.6
α = 0.78
Sf / Vf

0.14 0.20 α=0.93

Dα

α=1.12
0.12 α=1.55
0.15 0.4
0.10 α=1.67
α=403
0.08 0.10 α=409 e=3
0.06 α=507
0.2
0.04 Op/Ip=0.05 α=609
α=902
0.02
0.00 0
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
α Op / Ip

Fig. 7. Estimation procedure of case E. (a) Step 1 to obtain [Sf/Vf]0 ¼ 0.59. (b) Step 2 to obtain R ¼ 0.269. (c) Step 3 to obtain da ¼ 0.0176. (d)Step 4 to obtain e ¼ 3.

4.2.2. Case E2: accurate graphic method The dimensionless maximum detention volume Sf/Vf for
If an accurate graphic method is used, the following steps a ¼ 5.226 can be obtained as
are implemented.  
Sf Sf
¼ Dda ¼ 0:59  0:0575 ¼ 0:532:
Vf Vf 0
Step 2. From Fig. 4a, when Op/Ip ¼ 0.332, Da1 ¼ 0.178 for
a1 ¼ 4.7, Da ¼ 0.185 for a ¼ 5.226, Da2 ¼ 0.204 for Step 6. Sf ¼ Vf  0.532 ¼ 32347 m3. By Eqs. (7) and (8),
a2 ¼ 7. Let the maximum water depthpffiffiffiffiffi hf is 2.664 m and K1 ¼ 4.2.
ðDa  Da1 Þ ð0:185  0:178Þ When K1 ¼ ð2=3ÞCd 2gb, where discharge coefficient
R¼ ¼ ¼ 0:269: Cd ¼ 0.6; gravity g ¼ 9.81 m/s2; b is the width of spillway,
jDa2  Da1 j j0:204  0:178j
then b ¼ 2.37 m.
Step 3. According to Fig. 3a, da ¼ 0.0176 for b ¼ 2.277 and
Op/Ip ¼ 0.332. 4.3. The accuracy of graphic estimation method
Step 4. Let e is the amounts of curve between a0 ¼ 1.67 and
a ¼ 4.7 in Fig. 2, then e ¼ 3. Hong (2002) developed a numerical model which used the
Step 5. The difference of value Sf/Vf between a0 ¼ 1.67 and fourth-order Runge-Kutta method to obtain the solution of
a ¼ 5.226 is Dda ¼ da ðe þ RÞ ¼ 0:0176  3:269 ¼ 0:0575. hydrological continuity equation of detention pond. He also
116 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117

verified that the numerical solution was an accurate discharge 45000

simulation of detention pond routing by experiment.
Using Hong’s numerical method, Fig. 8 demonstrates the 40000

outflow hydrographs of detention pond for case A, B, C, D and

35000
E. From the outflow hydrographs of Fig. 8, the rising rate of
outflow hydrograph of case A, B and E are greater than that of

Storage Volume (m3)

30000
case C and D. Although all the maximum peak outflow rates
are identical, all the storage volume would be distinct owing to 25000
the difference of rising speed of water discharge between
various cases. 20000
Fig. 9 shows the relationship between storage volume and
15000
hydrograph duration, where case E obtains the minimum
storage volume and case D obtains the maximum storage Type A storage volume
10000 Type B storage volume
volume. It implies that if the designer adopts (1) a mild side
Type C storage volume
slope as the detention pond shape, (2) an culvert as the outflow 5000 Type D storage volume
device, and (3) a great b, a small storage volume will be Type E storage volume
obtained. A small storage volume will result in a small 0
detention pond and reduce the construction budget. On the 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
other hand, if (1) the side slope of a detention pond is vertical Time (sec)
to the bottom side, (2) the weir is used to be the outflow
Fig. 9. Relationship between storage volume and hydrograph duration
device, and (3) a small b is adopted, we can obtain the (hydrograph type denoted by relative ordering of maximum storage volume).
maximum storage volume. A big storage volume will lead to
a big detention pond and increase the budget.
Table 1 displays the difference between graphic estimations
and numerical methods developed by Hong (2002) for case A
to case E. Most of the relative errors are smaller than 3%
a 35 except case E with interpolation method. The discrepancies
Type A outflow hydrograph are due to graphical reading errors. It implies that the graphic
30 Type C outflow hydrograph
Type E outflow hydrograph
method can replace the numerical method in most cases.
25
Discharge (cms)

Inflow hydrograph β =2.277

4.4. Relational graphic estimation comparison
20

15 There are a few graphic methods to estimate the storage

volume. SCS developed various synthetic 24-hour rainfall
10
distributions (I, IA, II, and III) from available National
5 Weather Service (NWS) duration-frequency data or local
storm data (SCS 1986). SCS also developed a approximate
0 detention basin routing for rainfall types I, IA, II, and III.
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Kessler and Diskin (1991) adopted the dimensionless
Time (sec) gamma distribution function as the inflow hydrograph and
developed the graphic relationship between Sf/Vf and Op/Ip for
35
spillway and culvert outlets. They also built two efficiency
b functions as follows:
Type B outflow hydrograph
30 Type D outflow hydrpgraph
 
25 Sf Op Op
Discharge (cms)

Inflow hydrograph β =1.67 Spillway outlet : ¼ 0:932  0:792 0:2   0:9

Vf Ip Ip
20
ð18aÞ
15

10  
Sf Op Op
Culvert outlet : ¼ 0:872  0:861 0:2   0:9
5 Vf Ip Ip
0
ð18bÞ
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Taiwan Soil and Water Conservation Bureau (2002) adop-
Time (sec)
ted the triangular form as the IH and OH of a detention pond.
Fig. 8. Outflow hydrograph of detention pond. (a) b ¼ 2.277. (b) b ¼ 1.67. The relationship between Sf/Vf and Op/Ip can be expressed as
 Y.-M. Hong / Journal of Hydro-environment Research 2 (2008) 109e117
1 Acknowledgement
0.8
Spillway outlet (Kesslerand Diskin)
Culvert outlet (Kesslerand Diskin)
0.6
Sf / Vf
α= 0.6667 (this study)
0.4
TR-55,Types II & III
0.2
TR-55,Types I & IA
α=7.0 (this study)
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Op / Ip
Fig. 10. Comparison of dimensionless storage volumes predicted by different
methods.
Sf Op
¼1
Vf Ip
Fig. 10 displays the dimensionless storage volumes
comparison between this study, TR-55 (SCS 1986), Kessler
and Diskin (1991), and SWCB (2002). TR-55 underestimates
the storage volume compared with other methods. The
maximum storage volume occurs when a ¼ 0.6667 is chosen,
and the minimum occurs when Type II & III of TR-55 is
selected.
5. Conclusion
This study develops a series of charts to replace the
numerical computation for the design of single-outlet deten-
tion ponds based on the dimensionless hydrological continuity
equation and a simplified procedure. The developed charts can
be used to simulate most of triangular inflow hydrographs and
detention pond shapes.
The model is verified using the Central Taiwan Science Park
(CTSP) detention pond. The verification shows that the
maximum differences of detention volume between chart
method estimate and numerical model calculation is within 3%.
The discrepancies are due to graphical reading errors. The
proposed simplified graphical method enables expedient
determination of detention facility design without the need for
extensive numerical calculation. In addition, the cases studies
demonstrate that a detention pond that uses culvert (case A,
case B and case E) as its outflow device will need a smaller
storage volume than that uses weir (case C and case E) as the
outflow device. Though a greater b (case A, case C and case E)
causes a smaller storage volume, b’s influence to the storage
volume is minor compared with the influence of outflow device.
117
We thank many valuable suggestions proposed by the
reviewers of this journal which undoubtedly make this paper
more complete and readable. The National Science Council of
the Republic of China sponsored the research described in this
paper.
References
Abt, S.R., Grigg, N.S., 1978. Approximate method for sizing detention
SWCB reservoirs. Water Resour. Bull. 14 (4), 956e965.
Akan, A.O., 1989. Detention pond sizing for multiple return periods. J.
Hydraul. Eng. 115 (5), 650e664 (ASCE).
Akan, A.O., 1990. Single-outlet detention-pond analysis and design. J. Irrigat.
Drain. Eng. 116 (4), 527e536 (ASCE).
Akan, A.O., 1994. Runoff detention for flood volume or erosion control. J.
Irrigat. Drain. Eng. 120 (1), 168e177 (ASCE).
Basha, H.A., 1995. Routing equations for detention reservoirs. J. Hydraul.
0.8 1 Eng. 121 (12), 885e888 (ASCE).
Bos, M.G., 1989. Discharge Measurement Structures. International Institute
for Land Reclamation and Improvement, The Netherlands.
Burton, K.R., 1980. Stormwater detention basin sizing. J. Hydraul. Div. 106
(3), 437e439 (ASCE).
Butler, S.S., 1982. Point-slope approach for reservoir flood routing. J. Hydraul.
Eng. 121 (12), 885e887 (ASCE).
Chen, J.Y., Hong, Y.M., 2002. Approximate solution using a perturbation
ð19Þ method for detention pond design. Int. J. Sediment Res. 17 (3), 256e263.
Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R., Mays, L.W., 1988. Applied Hydrology.
McGraw-Hill, Singapore, pp. 242e264.
Donahue, R.J., McCuen, R.H., 1981. Comparison of detention basin planning
and design models. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. Div. 107 (2), 385e400
(ASCE).
Guo, J.C.Y., 1999. Detention storage volume for small urban catchments. J.
Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 125 (6), 380e382.
Guo, J.C.Y., 2004. Hydrology-based approach to storm water detention basin
design using new routing schemes. J. Hydrolog. Eng. 9 (4), 333e336.
Hong, Y.M., 2002. Study of hydrological routing models for detention pond.
Ph.D. dissertation, National Chung-Shing University, Taiwan.
Hong, Y.M., Yeh, N., Chen, J.Y., 2006. The simplified methods on evaluating
detention storage volume for small catchment. Ecol. Eng. 26 (4), 355e364.
Horn, D.R., 1987. Graphical estimation of peak flow reduction in reservoirs. J.
Hydraul. Eng. 113 (11), 1441e1450 (ASCE).
Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC), 1980. Hydrologic Analysis of Unga-
uged Watersheds with HEC-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Davis,
Calif.
Kessler, A., Diskin, M.H., 1991. The efficiency function of detention reser-
voirs in urban drainage systems. Water Resour. Res. 27, 253e258.
McEnore, B.M., 1992. Preliminary sizing of detention reservoirs to reduce
peak discharges. J. Hydraul. Eng. 118 (11), 1540e1549 (ASCE).
Mockus, V., 1957. Use of Storm and Watershed Characteristics in Synthetic
Hydrolograph Analysis and Application. U.S. Dept. of Agric. Soil
Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.
Soil Conservation Service, 1972. National Engineering Handbook, Section 4.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Soil Conservation Service, 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds,
second ed. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., pp. 6-1e6-4.
Taiwan Provincial Government Water Resources Department, 1993.
Study on the characteristics of triangular unit hydrograph. pp. 5e12.
(in Chinese)
Taiwan Soil and Water Conservation Bureau, 2002. The Technical Specifi-
cation of Soil and Water Conservation. Taiwan Soil and Water Conser-
vation Bureau (in Chinese).
Urban Storm Water Design Criteria Manual, vols. 1e2, 2001. Urban Drainage
and Flood Control District, Denver.