Montecarlo Hydro Graph

3.
0 Method
3.1 Overview
The Monte Carlo Simulation Technique as proposed by Rahman et al., (2001) comprises three principal elements: (a) a (deterministic) hydrologic modelling framework to simulate the flood formation; (b) the key model variables (inputs and parameters) with their probability distributions and dependencies; and (c) a stochastic modelling framework to synthesise the derived flood distribution from the model or input distributions. These elements are discussed below.
3.1.1 Hydrologic Modelling Framework

The proposed hydrologic model of the flood formation process involves the same components as the models most commonly used with the current Design Event Approach: a runoff generation function or loss model; a runoff transfer function or runoff-routing model, as shown in Figure 3.1. Together with a design rainfall depth or intensity, these components are commonly referred to as the rainfall-runoff process, and a model which encompasses these components, a rainfall-runoff model.
3.1.1.1 Runoff Generation Function A runoff generation function or loss model is needed to partition the gross rainfall input into effective runoff (or rainfall excess) and loss. Most of the previous derived distribution studies (e.g. Eagleson, 1972; Russell, Kenning & Sunnell, 1979) have used an empirical infiltration equation (such as Hortons equation) or a more physically based equation (such as the Philip and Green Ampt infiltration equations) to estimate the rainfall excess. In design practice, use of simplified, lumped conceptual loss models is preferred over the mathematical equations because of their simplicity and ability to approximate catchment
32 Flood Estimation Techniques Application of Monte Carlo Simulation Technique with URBS Model for Design Flood Estimation of Large Catchments
Rainfall Depth or Rainfall Intensity AEP = 1 in Y
Runoff Generation or Loss Model
Rainfall Excess Hyetograph
Runoff Routing Model
Surface Runoff Hydrograph
Figure 3.1: Design Event Approach
runoff behaviour. This is particularly true for design losses which is probabilistic in nature and for which complicated theoretical models may not be required. On this basis, the initialcontinuing loss model has been adopted in the present study. In this model, it is assumed
that no runoff is generated from a rainfall event until the cumulative rainfall exceeds the initial loss value; for the remainder of the event, loss is assumed to occur at a constant rate.
3.1.1.2 Transfer Function A catchment response model is needed to convert rainfall excess hyetograph produced by the loss model into a surface runoff hydrograph. The models commonly used in previous Joint Probability Approach studies includes the Kinematic Wave Model (e.g. Eagleson, 1972), Geomorphologic Unit Hydrograph Model (e.g. Diaz-Granados, Valdes & Bras, 1984), Unit Hydrograph Method (e.g. Beran, 1973; Muzik, 1993), Clarks Model (Russell, Kenning & Sunnell, 1979), and parallel linear storages (Blschl and Sivapalan, 1997). In Australian flood design practice, it is common to use a semi-distributed and non-linear type of catchment routing model, referred to as a runoff-routing model. This type of model, being semi distributed in nature, can account for the areal variation of rainfall and losses to some extent, and consider the non-linearity of the catchment routing response. Examples of models in this group in common use include RORB (Laurenson and Mein, 1988), WBNM (Boyd et al., 1987), URBS (Carroll, 2001) and XP-RAFTS. All these models are comparable for most applications, although they differ in their capability to use more detailed data if available. In this respect, URBS is probably the most advanced. For this reason and its flexibility URBS has been integrated with the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique (Rahman, Carroll & Weinmann, 2002). The URBS model is discussed further in Section 3.3.2. A comparison and discussion of catchment response models used with the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique is contained in Section 3.3.
3.1.2 Key Model Variables

The major factors affecting storm runoff production are rainfall duration, rainfall intensity, temporal pattern and areal patterns of rainfall, and storm losses. Factors affecting
hydrograph formation are the catchment response characteristics embodied in the runoffrouting model (model type, structure and parameters) and design baseflow. Ideally, all the variables should be treated as random variables but, for practical reasons, application of a smaller number of random variables would be preferable, if it did not result in a significant loss of accuracy. Given the dominant role of rainfall and loss in the flood formation process for Australian conditions, it might be expected that the incorporation of the probabilistic nature of these variables would result in significant reduction of bias and uncertainties in design flood estimates. Although continuing loss (CL) is an important variable in the rainfallrunoff process, it has not been included as a random variable in this study because Rahman et al. (2002a) did not include CL as a random variable but recommended it be considered an option for further study. Additionally the main objective of this study was to extend the method of Rahman et al. (2002a) to large catchments. Thus, four variables have been considered here for probabilistic representation: rainfall duration, rainfall intensity, rainfall temporal pattern and initial loss. In contrast to this, the currently used Design Event Approach treats only rainfall intensity for a given duration as a probabilistic variable. The input variables or parameters that need to be considered in a probabilistic fashion are further discussed in Section 3.2. The areal distribution of rainfall over the catchment is assumed to be uniform, and the average catchment rainfall intensity is obtained from the point rainfall intensity, using an areal reduction factor (e.g. Siriwardena and Weinmann, 1996). The continuing loss is assumed to be a constant; likewise, a constant baseflow is assumed, determined as the average baseflow at the start of surface runoff generation in observed events. A single set of parameter values for the runoff-routing model is used here; the calibration procedure allows
the determination of a set of model parameters for a given catchment, which can be applied with reasonable confidence. Thus, the adopted Monte Carlo Simulation Technique considers probabilistic modelling related to the runoff production only; the hydrograph formation part (e.g. runoff-routing) remains entirely deterministic. It has been left to future research efforts to determine if the probabilistic treatment of any of the above variables, kept constant in the simulation, might further improve the flood estimates.
3.1.3 Stochastic Modelling Framework

The basic idea underlying the proposed new modelling is that the distribution of the flood outputs can be directly determined by simulating the possible combinations of hydrologic model inputs and parameters values. Here, we adopted a Monte Carlo simulation approach for its relative simplicity and flexibility. The method is described below from Rahman et al. (2001). For each run of the combined loss and runoff-routing model, a specific set of input or parameter values is selected by randomly drawing a value from each of the respective distributions (for probability distributed variables) and by choosing a representative value (for other variables). Any significant correlation between the input variables is allowed for by using conditional probability distributions. For example, the strong correlation between rainfall duration and intensity is allowed for by first drawing a value of duration and then a value of intensity from the conditional distribution of rainfall intensity for that duration interval. The results of the run (e.g. flood peaks at the catchment outlet) are then stored and the Monte Carlo simulation process is repeated a sufficiently large number of times to fully reflect the range of variation of input or parameter values in the generated output. The output values of a selected flood characteristic (e.g. flood peak) can then be subjected to a frequency analysis to determine the derived flood frequency curve for the AEP range of interest.
The adopted Monte Carlo Simulation Technique is illustrated in Figure 3.2, and the steps involved in the modelling process are detailed below: 1. Draw a random value of duration Di, from the identified marginal distribution of rainfall duration. 2. Given the duration Di, draw a random value of rainfall intensity Ii(Di) from the conditional distribution of rainfall intensity conditioned on Di. 3. Given the duration Di, draw a random temporal pattern TPi(Di) from the conditional distribution of temporal pattern. The temporal patterns were conditioned on rainfall duration in such a way that temporal patterns for Di in the range of 4 to 12 hours were considered to be forming a homogeneous group, and temporal patterns over 12 hours duration to be forming another homogenous group. This was based on the recommendations of Rahman et al. (2002a). In the simulation, sampling of temporal patterns was done from either of these two homogeneous groups, depending on the generated rainfall duration. 4. Given the duration Di, draw a random value of initial loss ILi(Di) from the conditional distribution of initial loss. The IL distribution was conditioned on D similar to Rahman et al. (2002d) who found that initial loss for storm-core should be conditioned on storm-core duration. 5. Run the randomly selected variables Di, Ii, TPi, and ILi (with a constant continuing loss) through the loss model and runoff-routing models to simulate a flood hydrograph. 6. Add the baseflow to the simulated flood hydrograph and the note the flood peak Qi. 7. Repeat all the above steps N times (N in the order of 10,000 20,000). 8. Use the N simulated flood peaks to determine the derived flood frequency curve using rank-order statistics (non-parametric method).
Derived Flood Frequency Curve
Surface hydrograph AEP = 1 in Y
Runoff Routing Model
Repeat N times (10,000 - 20,000)
Rainfall excess hyetograph
Randomly select storm durations, AEP, temporal pattern and initial loss from the conditional distributions
6h
1 in 2
10 mm/hr
1 in 2 1 in 10 12h 2h 6h 1h 1 in 100 Duration 1 in 50 2.5 10 3h 1 in 5 1 in 50
IF D Curve
25 10 5 5
Storm durations Di
(AEP = 1 in Y) Random
Rainfall intensity Ii(Di)
Temporal patterns TPi(Di)
Initial loss IL i(Di)
Figure 3.2: Monte Carlo Simulation Technique

3.2
Distributions of the Key Variables
3.2.1 Rainfall Event Definition

The Design Event Approach (I.E. Aust, 1987) treats rainfall intensity as a random variable, and uses a number of trial durations with fixed temporal patterns to obtain design flood estimates. The storm burst durations employed in this method are specified, predetermined rather than random. In contrast, the proposed Joint Probability Approach in the form of the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique treats all three rainfall characteristics (i.e. rainfall duration, intensity and temporal pattern) as random variables. Thus, the new event definition has to incorporate the random nature of these rainfall characteristics. For the purposes of the approach a complete storm and a storm-core (the most intense part of the storm) are defined as follows.
3.2.1.1 Complete Storm A complete storm is defined in three steps, illustrated in Figure 3.3 in accordance with Hoang et al. (1999): 1. A gross storm is a period of rainfall starting and ending by a non-dry hour (i.e. hourly rainfall greater than C1 mm/h), preceded and followed by at least six dry hours. This is defined as the separation time, h = 6 hrs. 2. Insignificant rainfall periods at the beginning or at the end of a gross storm, if any, are then cut from the storm, the remaining part of the gross storm is named the net storm. (A period is defined as having insignificant rainfall if all individual hourly rainfalls are C2 mm/hr, and average rainfall intensity during the dry period is C1 mm/hr. Therefore C1 and C2 are used as insignificant rainfall filters). 3. The net storms, now referred to as complete storms, are then evaluated in terms of their potential to produce significant storm runoff. This is performed by assessing their rainfall magnitudes by comparing their average intensities with threshold intensities. A net storm
is only selected for further analysis if the average rainfall intensity during the entire storm duration (RFID) or during a sub-storm duration (RFId), satisfies one of the following two conditions: Condition 1: (RFID) F1.(2ID), where 0 < F1 <1 Condition 2: (RFIdmax) F2.(2Id), where 0 < F2 <1 where 2ID is the 2 year ARI burst intensity for the selected storm duration D, and 2Id corresponding burst intensity for the sub-storm duration d. The values of 2ID and 2Id are estimated from the design rainfall data in Australian Rainfall and Runoff (I.E. Aust., 1987). In the above event definition, the use of appropriate reduction F1 and F2 allows the selection of only those events that have the potential to produce significant storm runoff. The use of smaller values of F1 and F2 captures a relatively larger number of events; appropriate values need to be selected such that events of very small average intensity are not included. In this study, the following parameter values have been adopted: F1 = 0.4, F2 = 0.5, C1 = 0.25 (mm/hr) and C2 = 1.2 (mm/hr) based on previous work (Hoang et al., 1999; Rahman et al., 2001).
3.2.1.2 Storm-Core The available IFD information in Australian Rainfall and Runoff (I.E. Aust., 1987) is not based on the generation of complete storms but on periods of intense rainfall within complete storms, called bursts. If this existing information is to be used with the proposed new approach, it is more useful to undertake the design rainfall analysis in terms of storm bursts. However, as the duration of the bursts in ARR87 analysis were predetermined rather than random, it is necessary to consider a new storm burst definition that will produce randomly distributed storm burst durations. These newly defined storm bursts are referred to as stormcores (Rahman et al., 1998).
For each complete storm, a single storm-core can be defined as the the most intense rainfall burst within a complete storm. It is found by calculating the average intensities of all possible storm bursts, and the ratio with an index rainfall intensity 2Id for the relevant duration d, then selecting the burst of that duration which produces the highest ratio. For example, in Figure 3.4 (Rahman et al., 2001) the storm-core has a duration of 3 hours. For that duration the ratio with 2I3 is 4.0, compared to a value of 1.4 for 2I1 (duration of 1hour) which is the most intense rainfall burst within the complete storm.
10 9 8
Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45
Time (h) Start of Storm End of gross storm Storm-core End of net storm
Figure 3.3: Rainfall Events: Complete Storms and Storm-Cores (Rahman et al., 2001)
50 45 40
1-hr relative intensity = 28/20 = 1.4 3-hr relative intensity = 20/5 = 4.0
Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)
35 30 25 20 15 10
2
I1= 20 Storm-core
3-hr average intensity = 20
5 0 1 2 3 4
I3 = 5
Time (h)
Figure 3.4: Identification of a Storm-Core (Rahman et al., 2001)
3.2.1.3 Storm-Core Duration Using the definition of a rainfall event above, the distributions of storm-core duration (Dc) are determined from the rainfall (ALERT or pluviograph) stations located across the catchments of interest. A storm analysis is conducted from which the mean, standard deviation and skewness of the observed Dc values for these stations are determined. Rahman et al. (2001) obtained storm-core distributions for 29 pluviograph stations of varying record length (at least 20 years) in Victoria. The distributions of (Dc) were examined and an exponential distribution was found to approximate the distribution. This implies that, at a particular station, there are many more short duration storm-cores, than longer duration ones, and that the number of storms reduces exponentially with duration. The exponential distribution has one parameter and its probability density function is given by:
p ( Dc ) =
1 Dc / e
Equation 3.1
where p () stands for probability density, Dc is the storm-core duration and is the parameter of the exponential distribution. The parameter can be taken as the mean of the observed Dc values. The exponential distribution has a skewness of 2, and its mean and standard deviation are equal. For the purposes of this study an exponential distribution of storm-core duration (Dc) has been adopted.
3.2.2 Storm-Core Rainfall Intensity

In practice, the conditional distribution of rainfall intensity is expressed in the form of the intensity-frequency-duration (IFD) curves, where rainfall intensity is plotted as a function of rainfall duration and frequency. In the Joint Probability Approach adopted here, the IFD curves for storm-core rainfall intensity have been developed in a number of steps, as described below.
3.2.2.1 Development of Storm-Core IFD Curves As expected, Rahman et al. (2001) observed that there was a strong relationship between storm-core rainfall intensity (Ic) and duration (Dc). The strong relationship between Dc and Ic means that the distribution of Ic needs to be conditioned on Dc. The procedure adopted to develop storm-core IFD curves is outlined below from Rahman et al. (2002a). 1. The range of storm-core duration (Dc) is divided into a number of class intervals (with a representative or mid-point duration for each class). An example is given in Table 3.1.
2. For the data in each class interval (except the 1hr class), a linear regression line was fitted between log(Dc) and log(Ic). The slope of the fitted regression line was used to adjust the intensities for all durations within the interval to the representative duration. 3. The adjusted intensity values in a duration class interval form a partial series. An
exponential distribution is fitted to the partial series II (I=1,,M), where M is the number of data points in a class. Quantiles are obtained from the following equation:
I (T ) = I 0 + ln(T )
Equation 3.2
where I0 is the smallest value in the series;
Ii/M-I0; =M/N; N is the number of years
of data; and T is the average recurrence interval (ARI) in years. Rahman et al. (2001) found that an exponential distribution better fitted the partial series rainfall intensity data than the other candidate distributions and recommended the adoption of an exponential distribution, which has been followed here. Adopting the fitted distribution, design rainfall intensity values Ic(T) for the given duration interval are computed for ARIs of 2, 5, 10, 20, 50 and 100 years. 4. For a selected ARI, the computed Ic(T) values for each duration range are used to fit a second degree polynomial between log(Dc) and log(Ic) using the equation below.
log( I c ) = a (log( Dc )) 2 + b(log( Dc )) + c
Equation 3.3
where a, b and c are constants.

Table 3.1: An Example of Class Intervals and Representative Points for Storm-Core Duration (Dc) for Developing IFD Curves Class interval (hours) 1 2-3 Representative duration (hours) 1 2
4 - 12 13 - 36 37 - 96
6 24 48
3.2.2.2 Preparation of IFD Table The adopted Monte Carlo Simulation Technique begins with the generation of a Dc value from its marginal distribution. Given this Dc and a randomly generated ARI value, the rainfall intensity value Ic will then be drawn from the conditional distribution of Ic, expressed in the form of IFD curves. This requires the definition of a continuous distribution function, ideally in the form of a functional relationship between Dc, Ic, and ARI. However, as it is difficult to derive a functional relationship that suits different conditions, an IFD table is used with an interpolation procedure to generate Ic values for any given combination of Dc and ARI. Equation 3.2 and Equation 3.3 are the basis of the IFD table, used for data generation in the adopted Monte Carlo Simulation Technique. In an IFD table, Ic values are tabulated for Dc values of 1, 2, 6, 24, 48, 72 and 100 hours, and ARIs of 0.1, 1, 1.11, 1.25, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 500, 1,000 and 1,000,000 years. A linear interpolation function in the log domain is used between the tabulated values of Dc and ARI. It should be noted here that Ic values for ARIs less than 1 year and greater than 100 years are of less direct interest in the development of derived flood frequency curves for design flood estimation up to the limit of the 100 year ARI. However, these extrapolated values are required to cover the range that might arise in the Monte Carlo Simulation. The part of the developed IFD curves for ARIs of 100 to 1,000,000 years is subject to very large estimation errors from rainfall data records of limited lengths (in this study less than 30 years). Where the interest is on rare to extreme floods (ARI greater than 100 years), this part of the curves needs to be adjusted using design rainfall data from some appropriate regionalisation approach, for example the CRC FORGE method (Nandakumar et al., 1997; Weinmann, Nandakumar & Siriwardena, 1999).
3.2.3 Storm-Core Rainfall Temporal Pattern

A rainfall temporal pattern is a dimensionless representation of the variation of rainfall depth over the duration of the rainfall event. Following the procedure of Hoang (2001), in this study the time distribution of rainfall has been characterised by a dimensionless mass curve, (i.e. a graph of dimensionless cumulative rainfall depth versus dimensionless storm time with 10 equal time increments). Rahman et al. (2001) found that temporal patterns of rainfall depth for storm-cores (TPc) are not dependent on season and total storm depth. This means that dimensionless temporal patterns from different seasons and for different rainfall depths can be pooled. However, the patterns were found to be dependent on storm duration, yielding two groups: (1) up to 12 hours duration; and (2) greater than 12 hours duration. As the rainfall data used in the analysis was only defined at hourly intervals, the minimum storm-core duration used in the temporal pattern analysis was 4 hours. Storms with less than 4-hour duration are assumed to have the same patterns as the observed 4 to 12 hour storms. Design temporal patterns for storm-cores (TPc) could be generated by the multiplicative cascade model applied by Hoang (2001). However, in the present Monte Carlo Simulation Technique, historic temporal patterns have been used directly instead of generated temporal patterns similar to Rahman et al. (2001). That is, observed temporal patterns (in dimensionless form) were drawn randomly from the sample corresponding to the generated Dc value.
3.2.4 Storm-Core Initial Loss

The initial loss (ILs) for a complete storm is estimated to be the rainfall that occurs prior to the commencement of surface runoff (following the approach adopted by Hill et al., 1996), as shown in Figure 3.5. The storm-core initial loss (ILc) is the portion of ILs that occurs within the
storm-core. The value of ILc can range from zero (when surface runoff commences before the start of the storm-core) to ILs (when the start of the storm-core coincides with the start of the storm event). In computing loss, a surface runoff threshold value of 0.01 mm/hr has been used, similar to Hill and Mein (1996); it is considered that surface runoff commences when the surface runoff threshold has been exceeded. Catchment average rainfall is used in the computation of losses in the cases where more than one pluviograph station is available within the catchment. To enable the calculation of average rainfall, an access database program Rain Converter.mdb was developed (Morris, 2003). The program takes Thiessen Polygon Weightings calculated by GIS and computes catchment average rainfall.
3.2.4.1 Fitting a Theoretical Distribution to Initial Loss Data Based on the results of Rahman et al. (2001) and Hill and Mein (1996), the relationship between ILc, ILs, and Dc was expressed by the following empirical equation:
IL = IL [0.5 + 0.25 log ( D )] c s 10 c
Equation 3.4
This relationship gives ILc = 0.5. ILs at Dc = 1 hour, and ILs = ILc at Dc = 100 hours. It might be noted here that the use of ILs distribution (with a adjustment factor) as proposed in Equation 3.4 is preferable to the use of ILc directly as ILs is more readily determined from the data and can probably be derived using existing design loss data (e.g. Hill & Mein, 1996). Rahman et al. (2001) found the distributions of ILs for the study catchments in Victoria were positively skewed, and a four-parameter Beta distribution was used to approximate distribution of ILs. The Beta distribution was adopted for this study.
Flood Hydrograph
Rainfall/Streamflow
Storm-Core
IL c IL s
Time
Start of surface runoff
Figure 3.5: Initial Loss for Complete Storm (ILs) and Initial Loss for Storm-Core (ILc). (Rahman et al., 2001)
The four-parameter Beta distribution is detailed below (Benjamin and Cornell, 1970):
fY ( y ) =
1 ( y a ) r 1 (b y )t r 1 B(b a ) t 1
Equation 3.5
a y b and t > r
where fY(y) is the probability density, a, b, t and r are parameters and B is the beta function defined below:
B=
(r 1)!(t r 1)! (t 1)!
Equation 3.6
The mean and variance of the Beta distribution are given by:
r Y = a + (b a) t
Equation 3.7
Y2 =
(b a ) 2 r (t r ) t 2 (t + 1)
Equation 3.8
The parameters of the Beta distribution r, t can thus be determined from known values of a, b, Y and Y , that is, the lower and upper limits, mean and standard deviation respectively of the observed loss values at a site. There are a number of possible alternatives to the selected Beta distribution to describe the variability of initial loss, e.g. the Gamma, Exponential and Truncated Normal Distributions. The Beta distribution was adopted for its flexibility and because its parameters lend themselves readily to physical interpretation (Rahman, Weinmann & Mein, 2002d).
3.3
Catchment Response Models
As discussed in Section 3.1.1.2, a transfer function or catchment response model is needed to convert the rainfall excess hyetograph produced by the loss model into a surface runoff hydrograph. The process is also referred to as hydrograph formation and involves transforming the runoff from different parts of the catchment into a flood hydrograph, by means of runoff-routing (typically an Australian method) or unit hydrograph (typically a North American method). The following section discusses these two methods and how they have been integrated with the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique.
3.3.1 Runoff Routing Model

Rainfall runoff modelling methods in Australia involves the analysis and selection of rainfall intensity or rainfall depth for a given AEP. The rainfall depth is combined with a runoff generation or loss model to produce a rainfall excess hyetograph, which is the runoff from a storm event. The rainfall excess hyetograph is then routed through a catchment response or runoff-routing model to produce a flood discharge or flood estimate at the outlet of the catchment. In Australian flood design practice, it is common to use a semi-distributed and non-linear type of catchment routing model, referred to as a runoff-routing model. For hydrograph formation, different categories of runoff-routing models can be distinguished according to how they deal with particular aspects of representing catchment characteristics in the model, such as: 1. lumped or spatially distributed representation of the catchments runoff-routing characteristics and, for distributed (or semi-distributed) representation, the method of catchment sub-division (topographically-based or isochronal lines);
2. combined or separate modelling of the routing response of different catchment elements (overland flow, streamflow, natural and artificial storages); 3. adoption of a linear or non-linear form of relationship between storage and discharge; and 4. the ability of the model to deal with special features of the catchment or drainage network, such as modifications to natural flow characteristics in parts of the catchment, flow diversion points and various flow control structures.
3.3.1.1 Role of Storage-Discharge Relationship All the runoff-routing models use either a hydraulic or hydrologic routing method to represent the modifying effect that a particular routing element (e.g. an overland flow path, stream reach, a reservoir or other storage) has on the input hydrograph. These routing methods are based on the simultaneous solution of two equations: 1. The continuity equation expressing the principle of conservation of mass:
( I Q)t = S
Equation 3.9
that is, the difference between inflow (I) to the routing element and the outflow (Q) from it over a time difference ( t) is equal to the change in storage within the element ( S). 2. An equation that relates the discharge to the characteristics of the routing element. In the widely used storage routing methods this is the storage-discharge (S-Q) relationship:
S = f (Q)
Equation 3.10
The problem of parameter determination for a runoff-routing model can be seen as finding the set of parameters that defines the storage-discharge relationships of all the routing
elements used to represent the catchments routing response. This set of parameter values must adequately reflect the influence of different catchment factors and their variations, and its determination should be based on a sound understanding of the basis of the adopted S-Q relationship for each of the routing elements. In the following section different forms of S-Q relationships are introduced, and their hydraulic basis explained.
3.3.1.2 Storage-Discharge Relationships For a particular routing element, say a river reach, the relationship between storage and discharge in the reach may vary considerably for different flow magnitudes, reflecting the varying influence of the factors that determine flow and storage in the river or floodplain at different water levels. This is shown conceptually in Figure 3.6.
Storage S
Range of observed flood events
Discharge Q
Figure 3.6: Example of Actual S-Q relationship
It is generally not possible to accurately identify the form of the actual S-Q relationship for the complete range of flow magnitudes from either the flood observations or from hydraulic calculations. Different runoff-routing models use different forms of equations to represent the actual S-Q relationship in a simplified fashion.
The simplest form is the linear relationship for a concentrated storage element, where the volume stored in the element is linearly related to the outflow from the element:
S = KQ
Equation 3.11
The well-known Muskingum flood routing method uses a linear S-Q relationship for a distributed storage element, where the volume stored in the element is related to both the inflow and the outflow from the element:
S = k ( XI + (1 X )Q)
Equation 3.12
and the parameter X indicates the relative influence of the inflow (I) and outflow (Q) on the storage in the reach. In Australia, the most commonly applied runoff-routing models fall into the category of semidistributed models (node-link models) that use a topographic division into subcatchments, and a network of routing elements that are typically characterised by a non-linear power function relationship between storage and discharge:
S = kQ m
Equation 3.13
where S is the catchment storage in m3h/s, k is the non-linear routing coefficient, Q is the rate of outflow in m3/s and m indicates the degree of non-linearity of the S-Q relationship (typically 0.8). This is the form adopted in most routing elements of the RORB, URBS and WBNM models, and in the overland flow component of the XP-RAFTs model. The URBS model uses a nonlinear form of the Muskingum equation for the stream routing elements:
S = k ( XI + (1 X )Q) n
Equation 3.14
3.3.1.3 Network Runoff Routing Model Some models use a lumped representation of the overland flow and streamflow components, while other models treat these separately. All the commonly used modelling packages make provision for more detailed representation of natural or artificial storages. In most applications in Australia a network runoff-routing model is employed for design flood estimation. The network model arranges storages to represent the natural drainage network of the catchment. The distributed nature of the catchment storage is simulated by a series of concentrated storages for the main stream and major tributaries. Advantages and disadvantages of the network runoff-routing model are discussed below. Advantages Non-linear catchment response can be modelled. Spatial distribution of catchment storage can be realistically modelled. The effect of significant storages (such as reservoirs or large floodplains) on a catchment can be modelled. Variations or changes in catchment characteristics can be modelled. The separate effects of more than one significant stream can be modelled. Hydrographs can be estimated at more than one location in the model. Spatial variations in rainfall and losses can be taken into account. Disadvantages Considerable expertise is required for the valid operation of models and interpretation of their results.
The power law form non-linearity assumption may not be valid for large floods on natural catchments with large floodplains when linearity may be approximated. The use of a relatively complex model provides a false sense of security in the user. Where models have more than one parameter to be evaluated, interaction between the parameters often occurs. The effects of data errors may be greater with complex models than simple models. As with other methods of flood estimation, accurate estimation of losses to determine the rainfall excess is necessary even if the best, and most complex of models is applied. The most commonly used network runoff-routing models in Australia include RORB, WBNM, URBS, XP-RAFTS. All these models are comparable for most applications, but differ in their capability to use more detailed data. Presently URBS is the only model which has been integrated with the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique (Rahman et al., 2002b). A discussion of the URBS model is contained in Section 3.3.2.
3.3.2 URBS
3.3.2.1 Overview URBS (Carroll, 2001) is an event-based runoff-routing model suitable for integrated catchment management and flood forecasting and is a versatile runoff-routing networked model of subcatchments based on centroidal inflows. The URBS model originated from the WT42 model developed by the Queensland Department of Primary Industries Water Resources. The model, written in C programming language, is available under a number of operating systems including DOS and Microsoft WINDOWS. URBS has a similar catchment discretisation to that of the RORB model (Laurenson and Mein, 1997). An important feature of the URBS model is the ability to split the hydrograph
routing into catchment and channel components. The URBS model is used extensively throughout Australia for flood forecasting and design event modelling. Further information on the URBS model is contained in Carroll (2001). Two routing models are available to describe catchment and channel storage routing behaviour: 1. The Basic model is a RORB-like model (Mein, Laurenson & McMahon, 1974) and assumes that catchment and channel storage for each sub-catchment is lumped together and represented as a single non-linear reservoir. 2. The Split model separates the channel and catchment storage components of each subcatchment for routing purposes. The Split Model is the most versatile of the two, and may also be less demanding in terms of the number of subcatchments required to adequately define the catchment. Irrespective of the model used, each storage component is conceptually represented as a non-linear reservoir and Muskingum routing is used for channel routing (Carroll 1996; 2001).
3.3.2.2 Split Model This study has used the Split model. The Split model identifies the catchment and channel routing in each sub-catchment and calculates their effects separately. First, the rainfall on a sub-catchment is routed to the creek channel. This inflow to the sub-catchment into the channel is assumed to occur at the centroid of the sub-catchment. The lag of the subcatchment storage is assumed to be proportional to the square root of the sub-catchment area. Next, the inflow is routed along a reach using non-linear Muskingum method, with a lag time proportional to the length (derivative) of the reach (Carroll 1996; 2001). The Split model is similar to the Watershed Bounded Network Model or WBNM model (Boyd et al., 1987) except the WBNM model assumes the channel storage is proportional to subcatchment area rather than channel length.
3.3.2.2.1 Catchment Routing The storage discharge relationship for this reservoir which models catchment storage is given as:
A (1 + F ) 2 m S = Q 2 (1 + U )
Equation 3.15
where S = catchment storage (m3h/s), = catchment lag parameter, A = area of subcatchment (km2), U = fraction urbanisation of sub-catchment, F = fraction of sub-catchment forested, m = catchment non-linearity parameter. The non-linearity catchment routing parameter (m) is typically between 0.6 and 0.8. It is noted that the effects of urbanisation and forestation are applied to the catchment routing components. Therefore, through flows are unaffected by local sub-catchment urbanisation or forestation. Accordingly, this model is more suitable for large creeks and rivers where the main channel hydraulic properties are largely unaffected by the extent of catchment urbanisation or forestation (Carroll 1996; 2001). 3.3.2.2.2 Channel Routing Channel routing which is based on the non-linear Muskingum model as is given as:
S = f
nL ( XQu + (1 X )Qd ) n Sc
Equation 3.16
where S = channel storage (m3h/s), = channel lag parameter, f = reach lag parameter, n = Mannings n or channel roughness, L = length of reach (km), Sc = channel slope (m/m), Qu = inflow at upstream end of reach (includes catchment inflow, Qd = outflow at downstream end of the channel reach (m3/s), X = Muskingum translation parameter, n = Muskingum nonlinearity parameter (exponent).
It is noted that setting Muskingum n = m, X = 0 and = 0, reduces the Split Model to the Basic model, or the simplest form of the RORB model. Setting = 0 and n = 1, the model reduces to the Muskingum model. Setting Muskingum n to a value other than 1, assumes that the non-linear Muskingum model, which allows the model to vary lag with flows; a value less than 1 implies a decrease in lag with increasing flow, whereas a value greater than 1 implies the opposite (Carroll 1996; 2001). 3.3.2.2.3 Calibration Calibration of the Split model is best done by first matching the output of a rigorous hydraulic model to the Muskingum model to establish the value (e.g. Della & McGarry, 1993) or by estimating the channel celerity in km/hr, is the inverse of the average wave speed (km/hr) when n, the channel linearity parameter (exponent) is assumed to be 1 and stream length alone is used to characterise the routing process. Once and n have been calibrated, and m are calibrated by matching recorded events. 3.3.2.2.4 Input and Outputs The input to the model includes catchment specification, recorded river flows or heights, rainfall data and rating curves if river height data are either input or required as output. The catchment specification contains the subcatchment descriptions and river reach details used to characterise the hydrology of the river catchment being studied. Outputs generated from the model include screen plots of observed and modelled hydrographs and rainfall hyetographs. A series of output files are generated containing depths of excess rainfall, observed and modelled river discharges and heights (if rating tables are present), sediment washoff and traffic disruption. The model has been used successfully for both design and operational flood hydrology in Australia. The URBS model is one of the models used by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.
3.3.3 Calibration of Runoff Routing Method

In conceptual hydrologic models, such as commonly used runoff-routing models, the complex physical processes that determine the actual catchment response are represented by relatively simple equations with a small number of parameters. As indicated above, the relationship of these parameters with physical characteristics may be quite complex and difficult to establish in an individual case. In this situation, a small number of parameters can be inferred from observed model inputs and outputs by a process called model calibration. In the calibration of runoff-routing models, use is made of the large amount of catchment information that is embodied in flood hydrographs. The URBS models used in the study were calibrated Split models provided by the Queensland Bureau of Meteorology. Therefore no change of key calibration parameters such as catchment linearity = m, = channel lag parameter and = catchment lag parameter has been undertaken. The URBS catchment definitions files or vector files for the two catchments studied are contained in Appendix F.
3.4
Monte Carlo Simulation
Monte Carlo Simulation refers to a mathematical technique that is used to determine the outputs from a model represented by a complex set of equations that cannot be readily solved analytically. In this study, the Monte Carlo Simulation approach is used to generate a sample of NG (Number Generated) different runoff events from NG different combinations of rainfall and loss inputs. For each event, a set of values of Dc, Ic, TPc, and ILc is generated to define the rainfall excess hyetograph, which is then routed through a calibrated runoff-routing model to produce a corresponding streamflow hydrograph. A large number of hydrographs (in the order of thousands 10,000 to 20,000) is typically generated and the resulting flood peaks are extracted and subjected to a frequency analysis to obtain the derived flood frequency curve. The Monte Carlo Simulation Technique adopted in this study is similar to Rahman et al. (2001) and is summarised below.
3.4.1 Number of runoff events generated

The number of separate events to be generated depends on the range of ARIs of interest, the degree of accuracy required, the number of probability-distributed variables involved and the degree of correlation between them. For the study catchments it was found that at least 6000 to 12000 rainfall events have to be generated to produce relatively stable estimates of the derived flood frequency curve in the ARI range from 1 to 100 years. If the purpose of the Monte Carlo Simulation was to estimate flood events in the extreme range, or if more independent random variables were involved, the required number of generated events would increase by orders of magnitude. It would then be desirable to apply more efficient Monte Carlo Simulation methods, such as importance sampling (e.g. Thompson, Stedinger & Heath, 1997). The number of partial series flood events to be generated (NG) is obtained from the following equation:
NG = .NY
Equation 3.17
where is the average number of storm-core events per year, and NY is the number of years of data to be generated. As an example, for equal to 5, a total of 10,000 data points have to be generated to simulate 2000 years of data.
3.4.2 Steps in Simulation

To simplify the Monte Carlo simulation, a total of NG runoff events or stochastic events are first generated and stored as individual data files for use in the simulation. Each event is defined by random values of rainfall duration and ARI, which define the average rainfall intensity, a random temporal pattern, and a random value of initial loss. These values are generated from the distributions identified in Section 3.1.2.
As a first step, values of storm-core duration, Dc, are generated from an assumed exponential distribution. This has one parameter estimated as the observed mean Dc value, obtained from the pluviograph data from the catchment of interest. In the second step, a random value of storm-core rainfall intensity (Ic) for each given value of Dc is generated, using the IFD table described in Section 3.2.2.1. First a random ARI value is selected from the following equation (after Stedinger et al., 1993, equation 18.6.3b):
ARI =
1 ln(1 AEP)
Equation 3.18
where AEP is the annual exceedance probability, obtained from a uniform distribution U (0,1). Since the primary aim is to develop derived flood frequency curves in the range of annual exceedance probabilities of say 1 in 100 to 1 in 2, the interval U (0,1) is too wide. However, to cover a sufficiently wide range of rainfall intensities that might be of interest in the simulation, U was limited the range 10-6 U 1 e- . As an example, for an average annual number of storm-core events equal to 5, this results in 10-6 U 0.993; in terms of ARI (years) this is equivalent to 106 ARI 0.2. For the given Dc and ARI values, an Ic value is then read from the IFD table for the site of interest, using linear interpolation with respect to both log(Dc) and log (ARI) in accordance with Rahman et al., (2001). In the third step to generate a temporal pattern, the adopted simulation method randomly selects a historic temporal pattern recorded at the site of interest depending on the previously generated Dc value (refer to Section 3.1.3). The procedure is repeated NG times to sample NG temporal patterns. In the fourth step, storm-core initial loss values are derived by first generating a storm initial loss value from the Beta distribution fitted to the ILs data from the observed events at the site of interest. The generated ILs value is then converted to a storm-core loss ILc, using
Equation 3.4. The procedure is repeated NG times to generate NG values of Ic.

In addition to these four stochastic inputs, the simulation of streamflow hydrographs requires the following fixed inputs: (a) catchment area in km2 (for calculation of areal reduction factor) and (b) an estimate of continuing loss (CL) in mm/hr. Examples of the parameter files, and how they were applied to generate the NG runoff events for the two study catchments are detailed in Section 5.0. Finally, with the above fixed and stochastic inputs, each generated rainfall event can be converted to an input runoff hydrograph for the catchment and then routed through the URBS model to obtain a simulated flood hydrograph at the catchment outlet. The peak of each of the NG simulated hydrographs is stored for later analysis to determine a derived flood frequency curve. Given the parameters of the storm-core distributions Dc, Ic, TPc and ILc, the generation of data files from these distributions takes five minutes for 10,000 events, and the simulation of these data files takes about 1-1.5 hours for 10,000 events on a Pentium III 733 MHz personal computer.
3.5
Flood Frequency Analysis
3.5.1 Derived Flood Frequency Curve

A non-parametric frequency analysis method is used to construct a derived flood frequency curve from the set of NG simulated flood peaks. As these flood peaks are obtained from a partial series of storm-core rainfall events, they also form a partial series. Construction of the derived flood frequency curve from the generated partial series of flood peaks involves the following steps as outlined in Rahman et al, (2001): 1. Arrange the NG simulated peaks in decreasing order of magnitude and assign rank 1 to the highest value, 2 to the next one and so on. 2. For each of the ranked floods, compute an ARI from the following equation:
ARI =
NG + 0.2 1 NY + 0.2 . m 0 .4 m 0 .4
Equation 3.19
where NG is the number of simulated peaks, m is the rank, and the average number of storm-core events per year at the catchment of interest, and NY is the number of years of simulated data. 3. Prepare a plot of ARI versus flood peaks, that is a plot of the empirical flood frequency curve defined by the simulated flood peaks. 4. Compute flood quantiles for selected ARIs by fitting a smooth curve through neighbouring points. (Given the large number of data points, logarithmic interpolation between the two neighbouring data points, without any smoothing, has been adopted in this study.)
3.6
Applied Method and Programs
Flood modelling and estimation is more an applied science than a pure science. As such the methodology, programs and calculative steps used in applying the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique need to be recognised and understood. Specifically, there are quite a number of stepwise flood estimation procedural requirements as well as a number of programs that the new approach requires the operator to master. To illustrate the inherent complexities of the method in practical application, a process-program flowchart is provided in Figure 3.7. All programs used in the study were either developed by (Rahman et al., 1998, 2001, 2002) or Carroll (1996, 2001) for the application of Monte Carlo Simulation and URBS components respectively. The flowchart represents the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique and has been termed the methodology matrix. The methodology has been termed a matrix, as the process is stepwise and outputs of a particular step are required as inputs for the next step. The first column of the matrix represents the theory and background which have been previously described. The second column, represents the programs, processes and analyses
which are involved when applying the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique in practice. The third column represents the inputs/outputs for each step and their stepwise application. The methodology matrix highlights that the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique is quite a complex method, and at the moment a high degree of flood modelling experience and expertise in flood hydrology, and flood estimation is required to complete a full simulation from start to finish. In addition, there a number of sub-steps and intuitive decision-making processes that require the skill-set and level of understanding that only an experienced practitioner possesses to adequately deal with the new approach on a practical and applied level. What this means in the short-term, is that the new approach can be only be applied by experienced flood modellers and practitioners, whose cumulative hydrologic, hydraulic and flood estimation experience can overcome any unforseen obstacles or shortfalls in the process. This is particularly relevant to data limitations, which have the potential to shortcircuit the entire application of the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique as an alternative method of flood estimation. A further discussion of the application of the new approach can be found in Section 5.0.
Step
Process and Programs
Inputs/Outputs
1. Data Preperation
Data collection and review Manual review of rainfall data and stream gauging data URBS Rainfall Converter/HYDSYS
Rainfall data (ALERT or Pluviograph) in hourly format quality checked and compatible with storm analysis program Concurrent stream guaging data in hourly format compatible with loss analysis program
2. Storm Analysis
Use Fortran program mcsa11.exe (Monte Carlo Storm Analysis)
The mean D c t o develop the exponential distribution of storm-core duration Conditional probability distribution of I c /D c in the form of IFD curves Dimensionalised Temporal Patterns TP c
Calculate catchment average rainfall using Rain Converter.mdb 3. Loss Analysis Then use catchment average rainfall with streamflow file and Fortran program Lossca.exe (Monte Carlo Loss Analysis)
Four parameters: Mean, standard deviation, upper limit and lower limit of IL s to fit Beta-distribution of IL s . For a given D c, IL c is then determined using the empircal relationship with IL s .
4. Temporal Pattern Analysis
Pools temporal patterns from storm analysis of pluviographs into two groups with Fortran programTpana1.exe (Monte Carlo Temporal Pattern Analysis)
TP c up to 12 hrs TP c greater than 12 hrs
5. Monte Carlo Simulation (Generation of 10,000 rainfall excess hyetographs)
Use parameter file and outputs from previous progams above with program Rainurbs.exe (Monte Carlo Simulation)
10,000 rainfall excess hyetographs
6. Surface Hydrograph Formation with runoff routing model URBS
Use for loop with URBS32.exe and URBS vector file for study catchment of interest
URBSlog.csv is an output file which stores the 10,000 flood peaks/volumes at the outlet and other key locations within the study catchment
7. Non-parametric Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA) and compare to Design Event Approach and Observed Partial Series
Use spreadsheet for FFA Run Design Event Approach Use program FREQ.exe for observed partial series analysis
Derived flood frequency curve Observed Partial Series Design Event Approach results
Figure 3.7: Monte Carlo Simulation Technique Methodology Matrix

3.7
Data Management
3.7.1 Overview
Data management is a key part of applying the Monte Carlo Simulation Technique. As indicated in Section 3.6, the present approach is stepwise and therefore excellent housekeeping of files and organisation of directory structures underpins successful application of the approach. In addition, the technique in its present form produces a high number of output files automatically during each analysis. These output files require interpretation, modification and in some cases analysis for the approach to continue and be completed fully. These steps are detailed below.
3.7.2 Filename Nomenclature

Filename nomenclature is extremely important when applying the approach, particularly with the quantity and variety of data input files and outputs. The input and output file naming system employed for storm analysis, loss analysis and temporal pattern analysis are outlined in the following tables.
Table 3.2: Input and Output Nomenclature for Storm Analysis (using program mcsa11.exe) Input Description Output Description .psa Parameter file .dit Duration, intensity and total rainfall for complete storm For example: (a2500.psa) .dcs Duration of complete storm .cdr Storm-core duration .cdi Storm-core duration and intensity .stc Starting time of storm-core .pcr Sum of pre storm-core rain .scs Starting time of complete storm .etc End time of complete storm .tpo Output file for temporal pattern analysis .ney Number of events per year .mcd Mean of storm-core duration .oqn Input file to generate IFD table Record length for a site used in subroutine iana to generate .rln .oqn file .slt List of .cdi sites used to generate .oqn file in the subroutine
Input
Description
Output .ifd .stf
Description iana IFD table output from subroutine ifdt Statistics of fit for IFD analysis from subroutine ifdt
Table 3.3: Input and Output Nomenclature for Temporal Pattern (using program tpana1.exe) Input Description Output Description TPc up to 12 hours duration and greater than 12 hours .tpo Parameter file .tpc duration For example (john.tpo) TPc up to 12 hours tpl12.dat TPc greater than 12 hours duration tpgt12.dat obsrain.dat Observed rainfall details for each temporal pattern Table 3.4: Input and Output Nomenclature for Loss Analysis (using program losssca.exe) Input Description Output Description Parameter file .lan .ssr Starting time of surface runoff For example (anorthjla1.lan) Initial loss for complete storm (ILs) .ics Initial loss for storm-core (ILc) .isc Month vs. ILs .mls Month vs. ILc .mlc .psc Concurrent pluvio and streamflow data for loss analysis .acs API of complete storm event .asc API for storm-core ILs statistics (lower limit, upper limit, mean and standard .slp deviation) ILc statistics (lower limit, upper limit, mean and standard .clp deviation)

Montecarlo Hydro Graph

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Montecarlo Hydro Graph

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3.

3.1.1 Hydrologic Modelling Framework

Rainfall Depth or Rainfall Intensity AEP = 1 in Y

Runoff Generation or Loss Model

Rainfall Excess Hyetograph

Runoff Routing Model

Surface Runoff Hydrograph

Figure 3.1: Design Event Approach

3.1.2 Key Model Variables

3.1.3 Stochastic Modelling Framework

Derived Flood Frequency Curve

Surface hydrograph AEP = 1 in Y

Runoff Routing Model

Repeat N times (10,000 - 20,000)

Rainfall excess hyetograph

1 in 2 1 in 10 12h 2h 6h 1h 1 in 100 Duration 1 in 50 2.5 10 3h 1 in 5 1 in 50

Rainfall intensity Ii(Di)

Temporal patterns TPi(Di)

Initial loss IL i(Di)

Figure 3.2: Monte Carlo Simulation Technique

Distributions of the Key Variables

3.2.1 Rainfall Event Definition

Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)

3-hr average intensity = 20

Figure 3.4: Identification of a Storm-Core (Rahman et al., 2001)

3.2.2 Storm-Core Rainfall Intensity

where I0 is the smallest value in the series;

Ii/M-I0; =M/N; N is the number of years

log( I c ) = a (log( Dc )) 2 + b(log( Dc )) + c

where a, b and c are constants.

3.2.3 Storm-Core Rainfall Temporal Pattern

3.2.4 Storm-Core Initial Loss

IL = IL [0.5 + 0.25 log ( D )] c s 10 c

Start of surface runoff

(r 1)!(t r 1)! (t 1)!

Catchment Response Models

3.3.1 Runoff Routing Model

Range of observed flood events

3.3.3 Calibration of Runoff Routing Method

Monte Carlo Simulation

3.4.1 Number of runoff events generated

3.4.2 Steps in Simulation

Equation 3.4. The procedure is repeated NG times to generate NG values of Ic.

Flood Frequency Analysis

3.5.1 Derived Flood Frequency Curve

Applied Method and Programs

Process and Programs

Use Fortran program mcsa11.exe (Monte Carlo Storm Analysis)

4. Temporal Pattern Analysis

TP c up to 12 hrs TP c greater than 12 hrs

5. Monte Carlo Simulation (Generation of 10,000 rainfall excess hyetographs)

10,000 rainfall excess hyetographs

6. Surface Hydrograph Formation with runoff routing model URBS

Figure 3.7: Monte Carlo Simulation Technique Methodology Matrix

3.7.2 Filename Nomenclature

Output .ifd .stf

You might also like