Moving Rainstorms Impact Surface Runoff

'7
NG STUD
HYDWAULlC ENGINEERING SERIES NO. 17
A STUDY OF SURFACE RUNOFF
DUE TO MOV NG RA NSTOBMS
A Contribution to the nternationa

Metz Refereme
U~1iver@itg of I1
B3106 BCm
808 B. Bo~nrsSt-
@ 12
by
BEN CHlE YEN and VEN TE CHOW
Sponsored by
SCIENCE FOUNDATION
NATIONAL
WESWWCH GRANT GK-1155
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGlNEERlNG
UNIVERSIW OF ILLINOIS
URBANA, ILLINOIS
JUNE, 1968,
A STUDY OF SURFACE RUNOFF
DUE TO MOVING WAlNSTORMS
by
BEN C H l E YEN and VEN TE CHOW
DEPARTMENT OF C I V I L ENGINEER
U N I V E R S I T Y OF l L L D N O l S
URBANA, I L L I N O I S
JUNE, 1968
ABSTRACT
For a given total amount of rain falling on a watershed,
the temporal and spatial distributions of the rainfall, and conse-
quently of the surface runoff, vary with the movement of the rain-
storm. .In this study, the influence of the movement of rainstorms
on surface runoff from watersheds is investigated through the use
of a laboratory "Watershed Experimentation SystemH and by theoret-
ical analyses.
For the laboratory investigation, impervious watersheds

having the shapes respectively of a square and an approximate tri-
angle are used, Four different surface slopes are tested for each
watershed. The experimental results show that the movement of
rainstorms is an important factor affecting the time distribution
of the surface runoff, For rainstorms having the same duration
and total volume and the same uniform intensity of rain falling on
a given watershed, the stationary rainstorm gives higher and earlier
peak discharge than that resulted from any uniformly moving rain-
storm having the same duration of rainfall at a point on the water-
shed. The reduction and delay of the peak discharge is found to
increase either with the increase of the magnitude of the velocity
of rainstorm movement or with the decrease of the watershed surface
slope,
For the theoretical analyses, two-dimensional equations of
continuity and momentum are derived for spatially-varied unsteady
free-surface flows, Difficulties in obtaining a sat isfactory solu-
tion of these equations for the flow over watersheds due to rainstorms
are discussed. The hydrodynamic behavior of spat ially-varied unsteady
free-surface flows so described is used to interpret and confirm the
experimental results obtained in the laboratory investigation. Also,
a simple linear lumped-system model to simulate the surface runoff
behavior of the watershed is described and the possibility of its use
to synthesize surface runoff hydrographs from moving rainstorms is
di scussed.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The s t u d y d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s r e p o r t is a p a r t 06 a c o n t i n -
u i n g r e s e a r c h d i r e c t e d by D r . Ven Te Chow a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f
Illinois. 'The r e s e a r c h has been s u p p o r t e d s i n c e 1963 by t h e N a t i o n a l
Science F o u n d a t i o n w i t h two g r a n t s : NSF-GP-1464 on a p r o j e c t e n t i t l e d
"Basic I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f Watershed H y d r a u l its" and NSF-GK--1155 on a
p r o j e c t e n t i t l e d "Mechanics o f S u r f a c e R u n o f f . I ' The ma i n p u r p o s e o f
t h e r e s e a r c h i s t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e b a s i c mechanics o f f l o w o f s u r f a c e
w a t e r o v e r a r t i f i c i a l d r a i n a g e b a s i n s by c o n t r o l l e d e x p e r i m e n t s and
hydrodynamic a n a l y s i s o Under t h e g r a n t NSF-GP- 1464, t h e des i g n and
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a u n i q u e "Watershed E x p e r i m e n t a t i o n System" (WES) was
m o s t l y completed. The WES i s t h e p r o d u c t o f a system d e s i g n i n t e g r a t -
ing the electronic, hydraulic, pneumatic and s t r u c t u r a l subsystems.
As a t o o l f o r r e s e a r c h on h y d r a u l i c and h y d r o l o g i c problems d e a l i n g
w i t h f l o w o f w a t e r i n watersheds, t h e WES can g e n e r a t e a u t o m a t i c a l l y ,
under e l e c t r o n i c c o n t r o l , an a r t i f i c i a l r a i n s t o r m w i t h g i v e n t e m p o r a l
and s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t i e s and move i t i n any
d e s i r e d d i r e c t i o n o v e r a l a b o r a t o r y d r a i n a g e b a s i n area o f 40 f e e t by
40 f e e t o r l e s s , The r u n o f f f r o m t h e b a s i n i s i n s t a n t a n e o u s l y measured
by sonars and a u t o m a t i c a l l y t r a n s m i t t e d t o an e l e c t r o n i c computer f o r
p r o c e s s i n g and r e c o r d i n g t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s u l t s . The WES was used
f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l study d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s r e p o r t , w h i l e t h e r e p o r t e d
s t u d y i t s e l f was l a r g e l y s u p p o r t e d by t h e g r a n t NSFGK-1155.
For t h e e n t i r e c o n t i n u i n g r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t on w a t e r s h e d hydrau-
lics, t h e NSF g r a n t s have s u p p o r t e d t h e work o f f o u r f a c u l t y members, t e n
graduate students, f i f t y - e i g h t u n d e r g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s , and f i v e t e c h n i-
cians, The e f f o r t s and c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e s e p e o p l e t o t h e success o f
t h e r e s e a r c h must b e h e a r t i l y acknowledged. For t h e r e s e a r c h , three
d o c t o r a l theses have been c o m p l e t e d and s e v e r a l papers p u b l i s h e d . One
d o c t o r a l t h e s i s by D r . Nachman Marcus, d e a l i n g w i t h t h e same s u b j e c t
o f i n t e r e s t on s u r f a c e r u n o f f under moving r a i n s t o r m s , c o n s t i t u t e d a
p i l o t study o f t h e present i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Experimental data c o l l e c t e d
by D r . Marcus f o r h i s t h e s i s , when he was a r e s e a r c h a s s i s t a n t o f t h e
p r o j e c t , were a d o p t e d i n t h i s s t u d y b u t a n a l y z e d d i f f e r e n t l y . Addi-
t i o n a l e x p e r i m e n t s f o r t h i s s t u d y were p e r f o r m e d and t h e r e s u l t s were
c o l l e c t e d by Research A s s i s t a n t , M r . A r i e Ben-Zvi. Another Research
Assistant, Mr, Robert E. Grace, helped i n p r e p a r i n g t h e experimental
hydrographs. A l l o f t h e i r e f f o r t s a r e s i n c e r e l y appreciated, Grat i -
tude i s a l s o due P r o f e s s o r V, J, McDonald, Research A s s i s t a n t M r , A.
R . Rao, P h y s i c a l Science S t a f f A s s i s t a n t M r . Jay W, M i l l e r , and
Instrument Technician M r . Glen H. Lafenhagen f o r v a r i o u s aspects o f
t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e t o t h e experimental work. The a u t h o r s a l s o wish t o
thank Mrs. Joanne Garth f o r t y p i n g t h e manuscript.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1 . Introduction ........................ 1
Dimensional Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
H y d r o l o g i c Systems Approaches ............... 17
4-1. D e s c r i p t i o n o f the Watershed as a System . . . . . . . 17
4-2. Runoff from Rectangular Watersheds
under U n i f o r m l y Moving Rainstorms . . . . . . . . . 19
4 3 . Runoff from Rainstorms Waving Durations
Equal t o Length o f Time f o r Rainstorms
t o Cover t h e Watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
48.4. Magnitude and Time o f Occurrence

o f Peak Discharges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4-5 . The R a t i o n a l Formula Approximation . . . . . . . . . . 30
Experimental Equipment and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.1 . Experimental Equipment . . . * . . . . . . . .. . . . 35
5.2 . Experimental Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Data A n a l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.1 . Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 44
2 E v a l u a t i o n o f Storage C o e f f i c i e n t s
i n t h e Systems Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7-1 . Surface Runoff from a kdatershed
under Moving Rainstorms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.2 . Experimental Hydrographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7.3 . Peak Discharge and I t s Time

o f ~ c c u r r e n c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
7.4 . Lag o f Time Between R a i n f a l l and Runoff . . . . . . . 64
7.5 . Compar i son o f Hydrog raphs Produced
by Moving Rainstorms w i t h Those by
. . . . . . . . . .
65
~ ~ u i v a l e nS t a t i o n a r y Rainstorms
7.6 . Discussion o f Systems Approach
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
t o Synthesize Hydrographs
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
L I S T OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Summary of the experimental results . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

2. Comparison of the results o f systems
approach with the experimental results . . . . , . .

68
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure Page
2. D e f i n i t i o n s k e t c h o f t h e channel f l o w ............ 8
3. D e f i n i t i o n s k e t c h o f a two-dimensional s p a t i a l l y -
v a r i e d unsteady f r e e - s u r f a c e f l o w w i t h
l a t e r a l inflows ..................... 8
Hyetographs f o r a moving r a i n s t o r m ............. 21
Geometry o f t h e watersheds t e s t e d .............. 38
Schematic drawing o f t h e t i m e s i n v o l v e d i n hydrographs . . . 46
E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

W/i=-=4900, i L / v = 2 4 0
X
............:... 73

W X / i =-2550, iL/v = 4 5 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

W x / i = -2500, i L / v = 230 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

W/i=-1650,il/v=230
X
................ 74
E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a ' square watershed,

Wx/i =-1300, iL/v = 4 5 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

W / i = -1250, i L / v = 230 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Wx/i=-880, iL/v = 4 4 0 . . . . . . . . . O . . O . . . .
76
W/i=-630,
X
iL/v=4600 . . . . ~ . . . . . O . . . . .76
.
W / i =.4900, i b / v = 2 4 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

W X / i = 2600, i L / v = 450 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

. W x / i = 2450, i L / v = 240 . . . . . . . * . . . . . . . . . 78

W X / i = 1600, i L / v = 2 4 0 O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Exper i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

W / i = 1250, i L / v = 450
x
................. 79
W X / i = 1200, i L / v = 240 .................. ~n

11
Figure Page

X
W / i = 850, i L / v = 460 ................. 80

W / i = 640, i L / v = 450 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
X
W / i = 4 9 5 0 , i L / v = 230
Y
. . . . . . ~ . . ~ . . ~81 ~ . . .
W / i = 2600, i L / v = 440
Y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
W/i=2500,iL/v=240
Y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
W / i = 1650, i L / v = 230
Y
.............. .. . 82
E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a s q u a r e ' w a t e r s h e d ,
W / i = 1300, iL/v = 450

Y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
W / i = 1250, i L / v = 230
Y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
W / i = 8 6 O , i L / v = 450
Y
................. 84
W / i = 640, i L / v = 450
Y
................. 84
E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r an a p p r o x i m a t e
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W x / i = 4900, i L / v = 240 .. . 85
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W l i = 2600, i L / v = 450 . . . . . . 85
x
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W x / i = 2400, i L / v = 240 . . a a 86
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W x / i = 1600, i L / v = 240 . . . . . . 86
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W x / i = 1250, i L / v = 450 a . . 87
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W X / i = 1200, i i / v = 240 ...... 87
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W / i = 860, i L / v = 450 . . . . . . 88
Exper i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r an a p p r o x i m a t e
t r i a n g u l a r watershed, W / i = 650, i L / v = 440 . . . . . . 88
X
H a l f recess i o n t ime vs. v e l o c i t y o f upstream-movi ng
rainstorms f o r a square watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
H a l f r e c e s s i o n t i m e vs, v e l o c i t y o f downstream-moving
rainstorms f o r a square watershed ............ 90
viii
Figure Page
41. Half recession time vs. velocity of laterally-moving
rainstorms for a square watershed............. 91
42. Half recession time vs. velocity of downstream-moving
rainstorms for an approximate triangular watershed . . . . 92
43. Peak discharge vs. velocity of longitudinally-moving
rainstorms for a square watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
44. Peak discharge vs. velocity of laterally-moving
rainstorms forasquarewatershed. . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
45. Peak discharge vs. velocity of downstream-moving
rainstorms for an approximate triangular watershed 94

....
45, Time of occurrence of peak discharge vs, velocity
of upstream-moving rainstorms for a square watershed 95

..
Time of occurrence of peak discharge vs, velocity of -
downstream-moving rainstorms for a square watershed ... 96
Time of occurrence of peak discharge vs. velocity of
lateially-moving rainstorms for a square watershed .... 97
Time of occurrence of peak discharge vs. velocity of
. downstream-moving rainstorms for an approximate
triangular watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Time lag vs. velocity of upstream-moving ra instorms for
a square watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Time lag vs. velocity of downstream-moving rainstorms

for a squarewatershed . . . . . . . . . i O . . .100. . . .
Time lag vs. velocity of laterally-moving ra instorms
for a square watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101
Time iag vs. veioci ty of downstream-moving rainstorms
for an approximate triangular watershed . . . . . . . . . . 102
Storage vs. rates o f rainfall and runoff . . . . . . . . . . . .103
Compa r i son .between the hydrograph sy nthes ized by
systems approach andthe experimental hydrograph . . . . . 104
Experimental hydrographs for upstream-moving rainstorms
over a square watershed, sx = 0.0175, iL/v = 450 . . . . . 104
Experimental hydrographs for upstream-moving rainstorms
over a square watershed, s = 0.029, iL/v = 440 . . . . . . 105
Experimental hydrographs for downstream-moving ra i nstorms
over a square watershed, s = 0.029, iL/v = 440 . . . . . . 105
. t t for a square watershed,
wv/i = 1250, iL/v=450 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lo6
P
A
Figure Page
60. Q/Qp v s . t / t p f o r a square watershed,

wX/i = 1200, i L / v = 240 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
61. Comparison o f hydrographs o f moving r a i n s t o r m s w i t h t h e
hydrograph o f e q u i v a l e n t s t a t i o n a r y rainstorm,
s = 0.0175,
X
i L / v = 440, T I / L = 11 x . . . . . . . . . 107
s = 0.005, i L / v = 460, T i / L = 3.8 x l o m 4
X
. . . . . . . . . 107
63. Comparison o f hydrographs of moving r a i n s t o r m s w i t h t h e
s = 0.0175,
X
i L / v = 440, T i / L = 3.8 x 1 .
0 ~ .
~ .~ . 108
s = 0.029,
X
i L / v = 440, T i / L = 3.8 x l o w 4 . . . . . . . . . 188
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
W i t h t h e i n c r e a s i n g awareness o f t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s problems
i n the present century, t h e s u r f a c e r u n o f f f r o m watersheds, t h e most im-
p o r t a n t source o f water, has r e c e i v e d i n t e n s i v e s t u d i e s i n r e c e n t y e a r s .
These s t u d i e s a r e aimed a t o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h can be a p p l i e d t o
t h e d e s i g n , p l a n n i n g , and management o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p r o j e c t s . It i s
hoped t h a t w i t h adequate h y d r o l o g i c i n f o r m a t i o n on s u r f a c e r u n o f f f r o m
watersheds, b e t t e r methods can be developed f o r t h e e n g i n e e r i n g d e s i g n o f
t h e p r o j e c t s c o n c e r n ing f l o o d c o n t r o l , f a r m and urban d r a inage, w a t e r
supply, s o i l c o n s e r v a t i o n , w a t e r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l , and many o t h e r w a t e r
resources problems.
R u n o f f f r o m a s u r f a c e due t o r a i n f a l l i s a f f e c t e d by t h e p h y s i o -
g r a p h i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e s u r f a c e as w e l l as by t h e h y d r o m e t e o r o l o g i c
characteristics o f the ra i n f a l l . Numerous t h e o r e t i c a l s t u d i e s based on
hydrodynamic c o n c e p t s have been conducted on watersheds o r l a n d s u r f a c e s
under r a i nstorms, '
to 12" and e x p e r i m e n t a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have been p e r -
16, 1 7
formed by Mamisao, l3 Harbaugh and Chow, 14' l 5 Eagleson and Grace,
chery,18 and o t h e r s . I n addition, t h e r e a r e many e m p i r i c a l o r semi-
e m p i r i c a l approaches, w h i c h have been summarized and d i s c u s s e d by Chow. 19, 20
The i n c r e a s i n g a t t e n t i o n b e i n g p a i d t o t h e r u n o f f p r o b l e m can be observed
f r o m t h e l a r g e number o f p a p e r s and d i s c u s s i o n s on t h e s u b j e c t p r e s e n t e d
a t t h e r e c e n t I n t e r n a t i o n a i i - i y c i r ~ i v y y Syiiipas i urn he16 a t Fort Co:! i ~ s ,
Colorado, U.S,A. i n September, 1967.
Most o f t h e above-mentioned s t u d i e s do n o t e x p l a i n s u f f i c i e n t l y
t h e e f f e c t s o f t h e s p a t i a l o r temporal d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f r a i n f a l l on s u r f a c e
runoff. I n particular, t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e movement o f r a i n s t o r m s has n o t
been i n v e s t i g a t e d s p e c i f i c a l l y . To d a t e (1968) t h e o n l y p u b l i s h e d paper on
t h e s u b j e c t o f r u n o f f f r o m a moving r a i n s t o r m i s t h a t by ~ a k s i m o v ' ' and t h e
o n l y e x p e r i m e n t on t h i s s u b j e c t was performed a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s
by arcu us" under t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h 8 a u t h o r s . Using a n u m e r i c a l example
f o r oversimplified conditions, Maksimov demonstrated t h a t t h e movement o f
t h e r a i n s t o r m a l t e r s t h e maximum r u n o f f r a t e . For a d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n
- - - -- -
o ~ u m b e r sr e f e r t o t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g e n t r i e s i n References l i s t e d a t
t h e end o f t h i s r e p o r t .
which constituted a prel iminary investigation of the present study,
Marcus found the importance of rainstorm movement to the time dis-
tribution of surface runoff.
As the natural rainfall has both spatial and temporal varia-

tions, information on the effects of the movement of rainstorms on
runoff is obviously of both practical and academic importance, In the
present study, the problem of the time distribution of runoff from an
impervious conceptuai watershed due to a moving rainfail i s investi-
gated both analytically and experimentally. The factors involved in
this ra infall-runoff relationship are fi rst discussed through dimen-
sional analysis, The basic theoretical phenomenon of watershed hydrau-
lics is then discussed and a systems approach to the present problem I s
proposed. Finally, experimental results are presented and discussed,
No attempt has been made to simulate or model an actual watershed,
although a verification of the conclusions of this study by field data,
when ava i lable, would be des i rable.
CHAPTER 2, DIMENSIONAL A N A L Y S I S
The surface runoff from a watershed resulting from a rainstorm
varies with the physiographic properties of the watershed and the local
hydrometeorologic characteristics. In the most general case the latter
includes not only the size spectrum and the temporal and spatial distri-
butions of raindrops but also those factors such as the ambient wind
velocity and evapotranspiration which would affect the behavior of the
fall ing or flowing water.
The physiographic properties include the geometry and topog-
raphy of the watershed, drainage pattern, surface cover, infiltration,
etc. For natural watersheds these properties can be described by factors
such as drainage density, form or shape factor, compactness coefficient,
average land slope and channel slope, stream frequency, bifurcation
ratio, equivalent roughness, soil permeability, moisture content, and the
like. However, to describe the complex physiographic properties of nat-
ural watersheds mathematically or numerically in a comprehensive fashion
is by no means a simple task, if possible,
In order to obtain useful basic infornation concerning the
effect of moving rainstorms on surface runoff without unnecessary compli-
cation and loss of generality, controlled experiments on laboratory
,,, ,,4-a,
,.,- a
,s
,,I,- o f simple gemetr';
c ~ , 3 ~ c under mcvina
"3-r a l n f z l l nf simp1 Y f l e d p a t -
terns would be desirable. In the present study the rainstorms are assumed
to have uniform intensities moving at constant velocities across the
watershed. The raindrops are assumed to have a given constant size,
being uniformly distributed i n space and falling vertically to the water-
shzd surface. The ambient wind velocity is assumed to be zero. The
evapotranspiration in the laboratory is neglected as its amount is often
small as compared to the total volume of runoff or rainfall during the
period of experiment. The land surface is assumed to be uniformly sloped
and impervious, so that there is no infiltration loss, Furthermore,
other meteorological factors such as the temperature and pressure of the
air are assumed to be varying in such small ranges that they cause no
additional effect on the behavior of the falling drops and the flowing
water. With these assumptions the hydrometeorolog i c factors are then
reduced to the intensity of the rainfall i; the duration of the rain-
fall T; the size and concentration (defined in Chapter 6) of raindrops,
d and c, respectively; and the velocity of the rainstorm with components
Wx and W , in which x and y are two orthogonal directions on a horizon-
Y
tal plane,
The simplified watershed is a basin of simple shape, such as

a rectangle or an isosceles triangle. The orthogonal coordinate system
x - y is imposed on the basin which is so orientated that the x-axis coin-
cides with one of the principal axes of the basin and is along the
general direction of the flow towards the outlet. For a rectangular
basin, its length measured along the x-direction is L and its width is
The basin has a uniform longitudinal slope, s , extending
w ( ~ i g .1).
x
from the upstream edge to the outflow section and uniform lateral slopes,
Fig. 1. Definition sketch of a watershed
s , from the sides towards the longitudinal centerline (x-axis) of the

Y
basin. The interior of the basin is subdivided into a longitudinal
channel region and identical lateral overland flow regions. The longi-
tudinal channel is symmetrical with respect to the x-axis, extends over
the whole basin length L, and has a width B e Each of the lateral over-
land flow re.gions has a width b along the x-direction and a length ( w - B ) /
along the y-direction, extending from tile sides of the basin towards the
centerline, In other words, for the rectangular watershed so described,
t h e p h y s i o g r a p h i c f a c t o r s a r e s u f f i c i e n t l y r e p r e s e n t e d by L, w, B, b,
s and k, where k i s t h e roughness o f t h e b a s i n s u r f a c e .
sx' y'
F o r t h e s i m p l i f i e d e x p e r i m e n t a l watershed, the discharge Q
a t any t i m e t a t t h e o u t l e t s e c t i o n o f t h e r e c t a n g u l a r b a s i n can be
e x p r e s s e d as
i n which V, o, p , and g a r e t h e k i n e m a t i c v i s c o s i t y , surface tension,

density o f the f l u i d , and g r a v i t a t i o n a l a c c e l e r a t i o n , respectively, and
F represents a function. By d i m e n s i o n a l a n a l y s i s , Eq. (2.1) can b e
w r i t t e n n o n d i m e n s i o n a l l y as
A f t e r c r o s s - m u l t i p l y i ng a p p r o p r i a t e nondimensional parameters, Eq. (2.2)

can be r e w r i t t e n as
i n which A = wL i s t h e a r e a o f t h e b a s i n .
Similarly, t h e peak d i s c h a r g e , Q., and t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g t i m e
t o peak, t , o f t h e r u n o f f can b e expressed n o n d i m e n s i o n a l l y as
P
The p h y s i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e terms i n t h e f u n c t i o n s on
t h e r i g h t s i d e o f t h e equation i s as f o l l o w s : The f i r s t t h r e e terms
r e p r e s e n t t h e e f f e c t o f t h e b a s i c geometry o f t h e b a s i n . The n e x t t h r e e
&&& Ref erenca KODU

. zI lr l si niatL y
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of sl
B106 NCEL.
terms r e p r e s e n t t h e e f f e c t o f t h e s u r f a c e geometry o r topography o f
t h e watershed. The s e v e n t h and e i g h t h terms i n d i c a t e t h e i m p o r t a n c e
o f t h e r a i n d r o p s on t h e f l o w , r e p r e s e n t i n g i n d i v i d u a l r a i n d r o p ' s mo-
mentum, energy, and mass i n p u t s . I t s h o u l d be m e n t i o n e d h e r e t h a t t h e
c o n v e n t i o n a l way o f e x p r e s s i n g r a i n f a l l i n t h e form o f i n t e n s i t y ( d e p t h
p e r u n i t time) i s inadequate t o d e s c r i b e t h e momentum and energy i n p u t s o f
t h e raindrops. The n i n t h t e r m r e p r e s e n t s t h e r e l a t i v e e f f e c t o f t h e
r a i n f a l l duration. The t e n t h and e l e v e n t h terms r e f l e c t t h e e f f e c t o f
t h e movement o f t h e r a i n s t o r m . The s e v e n t h t o e l e v e n t h terms i n c l u -
s i v e l y r e p r e s e n t t h e e f f e c t o f t h e t o t a l momentum, energy, and mass
i n p u t s o f t h e r a i n f a l l t o t h e r u n o f f , w i t h t h e l a s t two terms e s p e c i a l l y
emphasizing t h e e f f e c t o f t h e s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f
raindrops. The l a s t t h r e e terms have t h e form o f t h e Reynolds, Weber,
and Froude numbers, respectively. Although they a r e n o t t h e t r u e
Reynolds, Weber, and Froude numbers o f t h e f l o w i n t h e b a s i n , they
indeed g i v e r e s p e c t i v e i n d i c a t i o n s o f t h e r e l a t i v e e f f e c t s o f v i s c o s i t y ,
surface tension, and g r a v i t y on t h e f l o w . I t must b e n o t e d t h a t t h e
v a l u e s o f t h e Reynolds, Weber, and Froude numbers f o r t h e f l o w i n t h e
whole basin over a p a r t o r t h e e n t i r e r u n o f f p e r i o d a r e d i f f i c u l t t o
evaluate, i f n o t impossible t o define.
For l a b o r a t o r y watersheds h a v i n g a shape o f t h e i s o s c e l e s t r i -
a n g l e w i t h t h e apex a t t h e o u t l e t and t h e same s u r f a c e geometry as t h a t
o f t h e r e c t a n g u l a r watershed d e s c r i b e d above, Eqs. (2.3) and (2.4) are
equally applicable. I n t h i s case L i s t a k e n as t h e square r o o t o f t h e
b a s i n area, A, and w i s t a k e n as t h e w i d t h o f t h e base o f t h e t r i a n g l e .
CHAPTER 3, HYDRODYNAMIC APPROACHES
Surface r u n o f f from a watershed i s e s s e n t i a l l y a three-

d i m e n s i o n a l f r e e - s u r f a c e unsteady s p a t i a l l y v a r i e d f l o w phenomenon w h i c h
i s f u r t h e r made c o m p l i c a t e d by t h e mass, momentum, and energy i n p u t s f r o m
the raindrops during the r a i n i n g period. I n d e r i v i n g a m a t h e m a t i c a l ex-
p r e s s i o n t o d e s c r i b e t h e unsteady s p a t i a l l y v a r i e d f l o w , an element o f
f l u i d o f l e n g t h Ax a l o n g t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l d i r e c t i o n o f t h e f l o w i s c o n s i d -
ered ( ~ i2).~ .I n a c r o s s s e c t i o n o f t h e f l o w w i t h an area A, the width
o f t h e w a t e r s u r f a c e i s B, t h e a v e r a g e l o n g i t u d i n a l v e l o c i t y component o f
t h e f l o w i s U, and t h e l a t e r a l h o r i z o n t a l v e l o c i t y component i s V. The
v e r t i c a l component o f t h e v e l o c i t y i s assumed c o m p a r a t i v e l y n e g l i g i b l e ;
consequently, t h e p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n can b e assumed h y d r o s t a t i c a s
t h e c u r v i l i n e a r i t y o f t h e f l o w on t h e v e r t i c a l p l a n e s i s s m a l l . The
lateral inflow i s i , i n terms of volume p e r u n i t t i m e p e r u n i t s u r f a c e
a r e a on t h e x - y p l a n e . T h i s l a t e r a l i n f l o w has h o r i z o n t a l v e l o c i t y com-
p o n e n t s o f u and v i n t h e x- and y - d i r e c t i o n s , respectively, For t h e
c o n t r o l volume c o n s i d e r e d (Fig, 2 ) , the n e t hydrostatic f l u i d pressure
on t h e f l o w c r o s s s e c t i o n s i s
i n which p i s t h e density of t h e f i u i d , g i s the g r a v i t a t i o n a i acceiera-

tion, and ;i s t h e d i s t a n c e o f t h e c e n t r o i d o f t h e a r e a A below t h e w a t e r
surface. The body f o r c e o f t h e f l u i d i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y
where s i s t h e slope o f t h e watershed s u r f a c e . The r e s i s t a n c e f o r c e i s

0
i n which s i s t h e energy g r a d i e n t o f t h e f l o w , o r t h e g r a d i e n t o f t h e
f
e n e r g y l o s t w h i c h cannot b e r e c o v e r e d . Since t h e f l o w cross s e c t i o n i n
t h e c o n t r o l volume changes, t h e r e i s a p r e s s u r e f o r c e a c t i n g on t h e s i d e
Fig, 2. Befini t ion sketch o f t h e channel Plow
X Y
~ l g . 3 . Definition sketch of a two-dimensional spatially varied

unsteady f reemsurface flow w i t h lateral Inflows.
w a l l o f t h e c o n t r o l volume. The component o f t h i s p r e s s u r e a l o n g t h e
x - d i r e c t i o n can b e w r i t t e n i n g e n e r a l as p AA. The t i m e r a t e o f change
X
o f momentum o f t h e c o n t r o l volume under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s
i n which the t o t a l acceleration i s
A p p l y i n g Newton's second l a w t h a t t h e t i m e r a t e change o f

momentum i s e q u a l t o t h e t o t a l f o r c e a c t i n g on t h e c o n t r o l volume, and
n e g l e c t i n g t h e h i g h - o r d e r terms, one o b t a i n s t h e momentum e q u a t i o n as
i n which D i s t h e h y d r a u l i c depth o r t h e r a t i o o f the f l o w cross-sectional

a r e a A d i v i d e d by t h e t o p w i d t h o f t h e f l o w c r o s s s e c t i o n , The correspond-
ing c o n t i n u i t y equation i s
23
i n which Q = UA i s t h e djscharge;
I n watershed h y d r a u l i c , p a r t i c u l a r i l y f o r t h e o v e r l a n d f l o w , how-
ever, t h e w i d t h o r t h e cross s e c t i o n o f t h e f l o w i s u s u a l l y not w e l l defined
and t h e f l o w is t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l . Therefore, i t i s o f t e n more c o n v e n i e n t
t o c o n s i d e r a c o n t r o l volume w i t h two p a r a l l e l s i d e s e c t i o n s spaced a t a
d i s t a n c e ~ y a p a r t ( ~ i3 )~
. .Consequently, Eqs. (3.1) and ( 3 , 2 ) s h o u l d be
modified t o s u i t the present condition. The s i d e - w a l l p r e s s u r e term i n
Eq. (3.1) v a n i s h e s as t h e s i d e s o f t h e c o n t r o l volume a r e p a r a l l e l . Never-
theless, t h e r e can e x i s t shear f o r c e imposed by t h e n e i g h b o r i n g f l u i d on
the side sections. If the x-component of the shear stress acting on a
plane perpendicular to the y-direction is expressed by then the shear
force is
Assuming these modifications and noting that approximately A = hay and

D = h, the momentum equation along the x-direction for a two-dimensional
spatially varied unsteady flow on the x-y plane averaged over a vertical
depth of flow can be obtained from Eq. (3.1) as
Equation (3.3) can also be derived from Newton's second law

by considering the forces and acceleration acting on the control volume
( ~ i ~ 3.). The mass of the fluid of the control volume is
The local acceleration is
The change of momentum along the x-direction on the cross sections
normal to x at Ay apart, by neglecting the high-order terms, is
and that on the cross sections normal to y is
The momentum along the x-direction due to the lateral inf1ow.i~
AM3 = p iAxAyu
The x-component of the momentum stored i n the control volume is
The net fluid pressure acting on the cross sections normal to x is
approximately
The x-component of the body force is
Finally, the total resistance force along the x-direction is
The Newton's force-acceleration relationship can be written as
Substituting the appropriate terms into the above equation and then
dividing it by p u a y and neglecting the high-order terms, one obtains
-
a " +Jhh + i ahu2
_ + -i- ahuv ah
at hat h ax h ay + 9 ~
The corresp.onding c o n t i n u i t y ' e q u a t i o n can be o b t a i n e d from Eq. (3.2) by

noting that
and
Thus,
i n which q = Uh i s t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l d i s c h a r g e p e r u n i t w i d t h and
x
= Vh i s t h e t r a n s v e r s e d i s c h a r g e p e r u n i t l e n g t h . E q u a t i o n (3.5)
q~
can a l s o be d e r i v e d by c o n s i d e r i n g t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f mass o f t h e
con t r o l v o l ume.
W i t h t h e a i d o f Eq. (3.5), Eq. (3.4) can b e r e w r i t t e n as
w h i c h i s t h e momentum e q u a t i o n a l o n g t h e x - d i r e c t i o n o f an unsteady
s p a t i a l l y varied flow. Simi larly, t h e momentum e q u a t i o n a l o n g t h e
y-direction is
There are many difficulties involved in solving watershed
runoff problems mathematically using strictly hydrodynamic principles
through Eqs. (3.1) and (3.2) or Eqs. (3.3), (3.5), and (3.7). To date (1968)
no satisfactory general solution of these equations has been obtained.
The flow usually varies both spatially and temporarily and it can assume
any one of the six possible regimes of free-surface flow:24 laminar
subcri t ical, laminar supercri tical, turbulent subcri t ical, turbulent
supercritical, laminar unstable and turbulent unstable flow with roll
waves. Within a watershed different regimes can occur at different
places or times, Moreover, the depth of water on the physical boundary
of the basin need not be zero even if there is no surface inflow through
the boundary. In other words, an assumption of h = 0 along the boundary
adopted by many investigators in an attempt to solve these equations is
physically unrealistic.
Even if the initial and boundary conditions are properly defined,
two difficulties still exist which hinder the development of a numerical
solution of the problem, The first is that the two-dimensional unsteady
spatially varied flow problem as expressed in Eqs. (3.1) and (3.2) or
Eqs. (3.3), (3.5), and (3.7) which are highly nonlinear, requtres a large
capacity computer to solve it numerically and is beyond the capacity of
the present (1968) commercially ava i lable computers. However, unless there
is a well defined channel, surface runoff can be approximated as one-
dimensional and thus the one-dimensional equations corresponding to
Eqs. (3.1) and (3.2) can be adopted in solving the problem approximately.
For the one-dimensional case, considering a unit width, one has A = h = D,
2= h/2, V = 0, T = 0, and px = 0. Thus, Eqs. (3.1) and (3.2) or
x
Eqs. (3.3) and (3.5) become respectively
and
The o t h e r d i f f i c u l t y i n v o l v e d i n s o l v i n g t h e p r o b l e m i s t h a t
t h e energy g r a d i e n t s changes i n b o t h t i m e and space. The l o s s o f
f
energy i n t h e f l o w , o r the value o f s actually consists o f three parts:
f9
l o s s t h a t would o c c u r i n t h e steady u n i f o r m f l o w o f t h e same v a l u e s o f
t h e Reynolds and Froude numbers as t h e i n s t a n t a n e o u s v a l u e s a t t h e p o i n t
under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , l o s s due t o a c c e l e r a t i o n o f t h e f l o w , and l o s s as a
r e s u l t o f r a i n d r o p impact o r l a t e r a l i n f l o w , This c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s
s u b j e c t i v e and an a c c u r a t e s u b d i v i s i o n o f t h e t o t a l energy l o s s e s w o u l d
be d i f f i c u l t t o achieve, p a r t i c u l a r l y because t h e y a r e i n t e r r e l a t e d ,
The r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e steady u n i f o r m f l o w has been s t u d i e d i n and
the resistance coefficient, i n t h e f o r m o f Darcy-Weisbachls f , ~ h & z ~ C,
' s
or Manning" n, can b e e x p r e s s e d as a f u n c t i o n o f t h e Reynolds number,
t h e Froude number, a n d t h e r e l a t i v e roughness o f t h e s u r f a c e w i t h a s u f -
f i c i e n t degree o f c e r t a i n t y and a c c u r a c y .
For a f l o w under a c c e l e r a t i o n , l o c a l l y o r convectively, the
work w h i c h i s done b y t h e f o r c e s i n v o l v e d i n t h e a c c e l e r a t i o n i s b o t h con-
s e r v a t i v e and d i s s i p a t i v e , The c o n s e r v a t i v e work i s r e c o v e r a b l e and hence
contributes nothing t o the value o f s considered. The d i s s i p a t i v e work,
f
w h i c h i m p l i e s a d d i t i o n a l r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e flow, should be considered
s e p a r a t e l y f o r c o n v e c t i v e and l o c a l causes f o r i t s e f f e c t on t h e v a l u e o f
For a g r a d u a l l y v a r i e d f l o w such as t h e t y p e o f f l o w c o n s i d e r e d i n
sf'
t h e p r e s e n t study, t h e a d d i t i o n a l f l o w r e s i s t a n c e r e s u l t i n g f r o m c o n v e c t i v
a c c e l e r a t i o n i s presumed r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l .
However, t h e a d d i t i o n a l energy l o s s due t o t h e l o c a l a c c e l e r a t i o
may n o t be n e g l i g i b l e when i t i s h i g h . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , j u s t l i k e t h e case
o f an immersed body a c c l e r a t i n g i n a v i s c o u s f l u i d f i e l d , a t p r e s e n t (1968
no f u r t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t i n f o r m a t i o n on t h i s k i n d o f energy l o s s i s a v a i l a b l
D e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t a d d i t i o n a l f l o w r e s i s t a n c e due t o r a i n d r o p
i s o b v i o u s due t o t h e mass, momentum, and energy exchanges, i t i s somewhat
s u r p r i s i n g t o r e a l i z e t h a t t h e r e i s o n l y l i m i t e d i n f o r m a t i o n on t h i s m a t t e
Woo and rater' i n d i c a t e t h a t f o r f l o w w i t h o u t r a i n d r o p impact i n t h e lam-
i n a r f l o w range,
the e f f e c t o f the raindrops modifies .the relationship
25
between t h e Reynolds number and t h e r e s i s t a n c e f a c t o r . Yu a n d NcNown
s t a t e t h a t f o r f l o w on c o n c r e t e s u r f a c e w i t h t h e Reynolds number o f m a g n i t
2
in the order of 10 , the cease of the battering of raindrops may result

in a change of flow from turbulent to laminar. In fact, even the simplest
case of the effect of a single water drop falling on a steady uniform
one-dimensional flow, the problem of drop resistance has not been solved,
For the more complicated case of raindrops of various size distributions
falling on an unsteady spatially varied flow, Harbaugh and how" made
preliminary laboratory studies and introduced the additional flow resist-
ance as part of a conceptual roughness but no comprehensive informat ion
is available.
In view of the above discussion, it is obvious that at present
(1968) a rigorous theoretical solution of the problem of unsteady spatially
varied flow is impossible unless assumptions for simplifying the problem
are made.
By using the momentum and continuity equations derived earlier,
the movement of the rainstorm really does not complicate the problem any
further. Mathematically, only the boundary and initial conditions are
different for the moving rainstorm case from those for the stationary rain-
storm case.
Following the scheme of solving the one-dimensional momentum and
continuity equations for runoff due to a stationary rainstorm adopted by
7
Morgali and Harbaugh,14 /4arcusZ2 attempted to obtain an approximate sol-
ution for t h e surface runoff due to moving rainstorms by expressing the
resistance slope as
i n which
as suggested by Harbaugh and Chow,l5 The coefficient c was assumed to
include the effects of the surface roughness, the acceleration of the flow,,
and the impact effect of raindrops, The exponent m was assumed to be only
a function of the basin slope, Marcus assumed that the flow in a basin
having the geometry as shown in Fig. 1 is one dimensional, L e e , consist-

ing of either transverse or longitudinal flow only. Using further some-
what unrealistic assumptions on initial a ~ dboundary conditions as it
was done by Morgal i and Harbaugh, Marcus rewrote Eqs. (3.8) and (3.9)
in fini te-difference forms and solved these equations numerically by
using an explicit method of fixed time intervals.
Nevertheless, Marcus ' solut ion can only be regarded as an
26
approximation because of the assumptions involved. Chen and Chow are
now proposing a more realistic approach in solving the problem of one-
dimensional sheet flow wh.ich would produce a better solution for predict-
ing the time distribution of surface runoff resulting from a rainstorm
moving across a watershed. However, a more accurate solution would
require not only the consideration of a two-dimensional or even a three-
dimensional problem but also a more accurate evaluation of the s term,
CHAPTER 4, HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS APPROACHES
4-1,
A system may be d e f i n e d a s an a g g r e g a t i o n o r assemblage o f

components u n i t e d by some f o r m o f r e g u l a r i n t e r a c t i o n o r interdependence.
A system i s s a i d t o be dynamic i f i t s i n p u t and o u t p u t a r e dependent
on t i m e , o t h e r w i s e i t i s s t a t i c . Systems can a l s o be c l a s s i f i e d a s lumped
or distributed. The lumped system c o n s i d e r s n o space c o o r d i n a t e s w i t h i n
t h e system and hence t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n s o f t h e components i n i t a r e
not important. A l l components o f a lumped system may be regarded a s
b e i n g l o c a t e d a t a s i n g l e u n i t o r p o i n t i n space. Any system w h i c h can-
n o t be r e g a r d e d as b e i n g l o c a t e d a t a s i n g l e p o i n t i n space i s s a i d t o
b e d i s t r i b u t e d , and hence t h e l o c a t i o n o f i t s components i s c o n s i d e r e d
i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e system.
I n accordance w i t h t h e above d e f i n i t i o n s , t h e a n a l y s i s o f r u n o f f
f r o m a w a t e r s h e d d e s c r i b e d i n t h e p r e c e e d i n g c h a p t e r can b e regarded a s
a d i s t r i b u t e d system approach. I n t h i s c h a p t e r t h e dynamic lumped system
a p p r o a c h i s p r e s e n t e d by c o n s i d e r i n g t h e e n t i r e watershed a s a u n i t w i t h
input rate, I , and o u t p u t r a t e , Q. S t o r a g e i n t h e watershed system i s
c o n s i d e r e d , b u t t h e a c t u a l mechanics o f t r a n s f o r m i n g r a i n f a l l i n t o r u n o f f
i n s i d e t h e system i s n o t i n v o l v e d i n t h i s lumped system approach.
A system may be s i m u l a t e d by a s e t o f m a t h e m a t i c a l e q u a t i o n s .
By c o n s i d e r i n g t h e watershed as a lumped system, the c o n t i n u i t y r e l a t i o n -
s h i p i n t h e system can be w r i t t e n as
i n w h i c h t i s t h e t i m e and S i s t h e s t o r a g e i n t h e system. I n hydrologic

systems, t h e s t o r a g e may be e x p r e s s e d as
i n w h i c h t h e d e r i v a t i v e s o f Q and I may be i m p l i c i t l y i n c l u d e d . Strictly

s p e a k i n g , t h e response o f a w a t e r s h e d t o r a i n f a l l i n p r o d u c i n g r u n o f f i s
a n o n l i n e a r process. However, t h e n o n l i n e a r e f f e c t o f t e n seems t o be
s m a l l and Eqs. (4.1) and (4.2) t o g e t h e r czn b e l i n e a r l i z e d m a t h e m a t i c a l l y
20
o r d e s c r i b e d by a l i n e a r t h e o r y . As a f i r s t a p p r o x i m a t i o n , t h e s t o r a g e
function, Eq. (4.2), can be assumed as
where t h e K ' s a r e system p a r a m e t e r s o r s t o r a g e c o n s t a n t s ,

I n f o r m a t i o n on i n p u t t o t h e system as a f u n c t i o n o f t i m e i s
o f t e n known, For a r a i n f a l l o f u n i f o r m i n t e n s i t y i , moving a c r o s s a
b a s i n o f s i m p l e geometry, t h e i n p u t r a t e 1 can be expressed a s
where t i s t h e l e n g t h o f time r e q u i r e d f o r the r a i n f a l l t o cover the

0
e n t i r e basin. E q u a t i o n (4.4) represents a quadratic type o f i n p u t r a t e
due t o r a i n s t o r m s moving w i t h a c o n s t a n t v e l o c i t y i n any d i r e c t i o n o v e r
the basin. T h i s would a p p l y t o b a s i n s o f such shapes as a square and a
t r i a n g l e w i t h o r w i t h o u t i n f l o w f r o m o t h e r b a s i n s and t o v a r i o u s r a i n -
f a l l d i s t r i b u t i o n and r a i n s t o r m movement p a t t e r n s t h a t w o u l d p r o d u c e t h e
quadratic time function o f the input rate.
E q u a t i o n s ( 4 . 1 ) ~ (4.3), and (4.4) together y i e l d the following
d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n f o r t h e d i s c h a r g e , Q, from t h e watershed:
The s o l u t i o n o f t h i s f i r s t - o r d e r d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n i s
=0.6, NCEL
208 N. Romine S t r e e t
Brbana, I l l i n o , $ ~ 61801
where t h e c o n s t a n t C i s t o be d e t e r m i n e d by t h e i n i t i a l c o n d i t i o n where
the s o l u t i o n applies.
The r e l a t i o n s h i p between r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f as expressed i n

Eq. (4.6) i s r e s t r i c t e d o n l y by t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t Eqs. (4.3) and (4.4)
must b e s a t i s f i e d . E q u a t i o n (4.4) i s a p p l i c a b l e t o r e c t a n g u l a r watersheds
under r a i n s t o r m s moving a t a v e l o c i t y w h i c h i s a q u a d r a t i c f u n c t i o n o f t i m e ,
t o t r i a n g u l a r watersheds w i t h r a i n s t o r m s moving a t a u n i f o r m v e l o c i t y , and
t o o t h e r s i m p l e cases. T a k i n g as an example t h e s i m p l e case o f r a i n s t o r m s
moving a t a u n i f o r m v e l o c i t y a c r o s s a r e c t a n g u l a r w a t e r s h e d w i l l be d i s -
cussed h e r e i n .
The v a l u e s o f t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s K4, Kg, and Kg i n Eq. (4.4) vary
w i t h t h e r a i n f a l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t h e w a t e r s h e d geometry. For sim-
p l i c i t y without losing generality, t h e r a i n s t o r m i s assumed t o move e i t h e r
l o n g i t u d i n a l l y o r l a t e r a l l y a c r o s s a r e c t a n g u l a r b a s i n a t a c o n s t a n t speed;
i.e., f o l l o w i n g t h e n o t a t i o n s used i n Chapter 2, W = 0 o r Wx = 0, respec-
Y
tively. For such r a i n s t o r m s , t h e l e n g t h o f t i m e , r e q u ir e d f o r t h e
to,
r a i n s t o r m t o cover t h e e n t i r e b a s i n i s equal t o e i t h e r L / \ wX ( o r w/l wY 1 ,
and Kg = 0. Hence, Eq. (4.6) can be s i m p l i f i e d a s
For t h e p a r t i c u l a r i n i t i a l c o n d i t i o n o f Q = 0 a t t = G, Eq. (4.7) yields
For t h e p r e s e n t case, t h e d u r a t i o n o f r a i n f a l l , T, i s t h e same

f o r a l l p o i n t s i n t h e watershed. Furthermore, t h e r e may be a t i m e l a g tl
between t h e moment t h e r a i n b e g i n s t o f a l l on t h e b a s i n and t h e t i m e t h e
d i s c h a r g e f i r s t appears a t t h e b a s i n o u t l e t . W i t h t h e above assumptions,
t h e i n p u t r a t e I a,t w h i c h t h e r a i n f a l l s on t h e watershed a t any t i m e
-1-
t > 0 f o r a semi- i n f i n i t e " l o n g r a i n s t o r m can be expressed by s i n g u l a r i t y

-1-l-
*b d\
functions as
Thus, by s u p e r p o s i t i o n , f o r a rainstorm o f duration T
The c o r r e s p o n d i n g hyetographs f o r T > t and T < t a r e shown i n F i g . 4.

0 0
For v a r i o u s cases o f r a i n f a l l i n p u t , t h e v a l u e s o f K4 and K
5
i n Eq. (4.4) can b e d e t e r m i n e d by comparing E q . (4.4) w i t h Eq. (4.10).
For t h e s e cases t h e r a i n f a l l - r u n o f f r e l a t i o n s h i p by Eq. (4.7) can be
d e r i v e d as f o l l o w s :
For t h i s case, t h e r a i n f a l l d u r a t i o n T i s g r e a t e r than t h e

l e n g t h o f time, t
n
, r e q u i r e d f o r t h e r a i n s t o r m t o cover the e n t i r e water-
shed. The i n p u t r a t e t o t h e watershed changes i n f o u r d i f f e r e n t p e r i o d s
a s shown i n F i g . 4a. During t h e f i r s t p e r i o d o r t - tl 2 t > -t the
1 0
r a i n s t o r m i s moving t o i n c r e a s e i t s coverage o v e r t h e watershed and
Eq. (4.10) gives
-1-
4,
From t i m e z e r o t o p o s i t i v e i n f i n i t y .
-1-1,
,L ,\
The e x p r e s s i o n o f a s i n g u l a r i t y f u n c t i o n r e p r e s e n t s
F u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n on s i n g u l a r i t y f u n c t i o n s can be found i n Refs, 2 7

and 28.
(b) T < t
0
F i g . 4. metographs for .a moving rainstorm

Thus,
and
For t h e s e v a l u e s o f K4 and Kg and t h e i n i t i a l c o n d i t i o n o f Q = 0 a t

t = 0, Eq. (4.8) y i e l d s
f o r to - tl 2 t 0.
D u r i n g t h e second p e r i o d o r T - tl t 2 -
t 0
tl, the input i s
constant, i .e.,
Therefore,
and Eq. (4.7) gives

On t h e condition t h a t t h e values of Q a t t = to - t
1
given by
Eqs. (4.12) and (4.13) should be equal, one obtains
forT- t l a t > to -
For t h e t h i r d period of decreasing i n p u t , t o +T - tl 2 t 3T - tl'
Eq. (4.10) y i e l d s
Thus,
and
W i t h t h e s e values of K4 and Kg and t h e condition t h a t t h e values of Q a t

t = T - 1
tgiven by Eqs. (4.14) and (4.7) should be e q u a l , one o b t a i n s
from E q . (4.7)
f o r t o + T - t1 t 2 T -
Finally, during the recession period, t 2 t0 + T - tl'
there is no input. Consequently, both K and Kg are zero, and hence

4
Eq. (4.7) yields
Equating this equation with Q in Eq. (4.16) at t = to +T- tl, one

obta ins
For this case, the watershed is never fully covered by rain.

The input into the system, as shown in Fig. 4b, again changes in four
periods. For the first period of linearly increasing input, the solution
is the same as for the first period in the previous case except that it is
valid only up to the time T, i .e.,
for T - tl 2 t 20.
During the second period of t
0
-
tl 2 t>T - tl, the input is
sf a constant rate of
Thus,
and
Consequently, one o b t a i n s
f o r to - tl 2 t >T -t
1"
Similarly, Eqs. (4.7) and (4.10) yield
f o r t h e t h i r d p e r i o d o f to + T - tl t 2 t0 - tl; and
for the fourth period of t 2 to + T - tl.

I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t e x c e p t f o r t h e second p e r i o d , t h e expres-
sions f o r the r u n o f f as a f u n c t i o n o f time f o r various o t h e r p e r i o d s a r e t h e
same f o r cases ( a ) and ( b ) . I t s h o u l d a l s o be mentioned h e r e t h a t f o r v a r i -
ous cases o f r a i n s t o r m movement, Eqs. (4.10), (4.12), (4.14), (4.16), (4.17),

and (4.19) can be further simplified. For the case of a rainstorm
moving towards the upstream direction, discharge from the watershed
presumably starts as soon as the rain begins, i.e., tl = 0. For the
case in which the rain reaches the outlet of the watershed before the
first drops of rain falling on the watershed flow to the outlet, the
time t 1 is equal to L / / wx( and w/2I wyl , resptctiveiy, for rainstorms
moving longitudinally and iaterally,
Cases:
P
Stationary rainstorms, to - tl = 0.
In this case, if the rainfall covers the entire watershed, then

I = i A for the period 0 6 t < T. Thus, with K4 = 1 and Kg = 0, Eq. (4.8)
gives
for "$ t 2 00,

After the rain stops at T, I = 0 and K4 = Kg = 0. Thus,
Eq. (4.7) yields
for t 2 T.
Equations (4.20) and (4.21) are the well-known solution for a
linear watershed system with constant input of finite duration @ef. 20,
14-27).
P Q,,
a For the case of rainfall with a duration T equal to the length
of time to required for the rainstorm to cover the entire watershed,
further simplification can be made on the solutions in the preceeding
section. With t = T, Eq. (4.10) gives
0
for the input rate; Eq. (4.12) gives
for 2t0 - tl 2 t 2 t
0
- tl; and Eq. (4.17) gives
for t 3 2to - tl.

It should be mentioned a g a i n that for the case of rainstorms
moving in the upstream direction, tl = 0, For the case of rainstorms
moving downstream and reaching the outlet of the watershed before the flow
of the first drops of rainfall on the basin arrives there, tl = L/I wxl = to.
Consequently, for this case, Eqs. (4.12)~ (4.24), and (4.25) yield,
respect i vely,
for 0 2 t;
for t ,) t
0
2 0; and
for t t
oa
The time at which peak discharge occurs can be obtained by

differemtiating the discharge-time relationships given in the preceeding
sections and letting the derivative of the discharge with respect to time
equal to zero. For the general case of T f t as expressed by Eqs, (4.121,
0
(4.14) or (4.19), (4.16), and (4.17), it is obvious that the peak discharg
-
occurs during the third period, between (to tl) or (T -
tl) and
(to + T -
tl) By differentiating Eq. (4.16) with respect to time and
equating the derivative to zero, one obtains the time for maximum dis-
charge as
and the corresponding peak discharge as
It should be mentioned that the value of t given by Eq. (4.29) should
P
be within the period where E q . (4.16) is valid, In some actual watersheds,
the peak discharge may infrequently occur outside this period. But the
present mathematical model is incapable of representing this situation,
For the special case of to = T, the peak discharge and the time
it occurs can either be derived from Eqs. (4.29) and (4.30) or from dif-
ferentiation of Eq. (4.24). The result is
and
and 2to - tl
where t should be within the period between
P to -
t1
a
Otherwise the maximum discharge occurred within this period would be the
peak flow rate,
If the rainstorm moves along the longitudinal direction towards
downstream, i.e., Wx > 0, and the rain falls on the outlet of the watershed
before the,upstreamsurface flow reaches there, one has tl - to = L/Wx.
Consequently,
and
Of course the evaluated t is valid only within the period between t = 0

P
and t =
to'
A special case for the watershed system described in Section

is that the storage is a constant, i.e., neither a function of time nor a
function of output or input. In other words, S = K2 and K1 = K3 = 0. Hence
Eq. (4.1) gives the discharge from the watershed as
By expressing H = i A 1 where A ' is the effective area of the watershed under

rainfall actually contributing to the discharge at any time, one has
Equation (4.36) can be written in the form of the rational formula
Q = CiA
with the coefficient C = 1 and A = A'o
The above equation for the rational
formula may also be interpreted from Eq. (4.35) by considering I = C I A to
yeild Eq. (4.37), * in which A is the ares of the watershed and C is a coef-
ficient to account for the movement of the rainstorm, assuming that there
are no other Posses.
For practical purposes, many empi rical or semi-empirical

formulas have been proposed to relate the maximum discharge frwn watersheds
to rainfalls, The rational formula is a representative of these formulas
and presumably applies only when the length of time of rainfall at an area
i s greater than a so-called "time of concentration." It is obvious from the
comparison between Eq. (2.4) and Eqo (4.37) that even for a given watershed
the coefficient C i s not a constant but a complex unknown time function of
the fluid and rainfall characteristics, Further discussions on the rational
formula can be found elsewhere (~ef.19 and Ref. 20, pp. * 6 to 14-8,
-
20-8 to 2 3 - 9 ) . Despite its many shortcomings and lack of theoretical just i -
fication, the rational formula has won its popularity because of its simplicity,
Therefore, it might be worth the effort to investigate herewith whether the
rational formula can be justified as a first approximation in predicting the
peak discharge from a moving rainstorm,
In order to obtain an expression for A' in E q o (4.36) or C in
E q o (4.37) as a function of time, the change of discharge dQ in a small increment

of time dt is considered, The rainstorm of a uniform intensity is assumed to

move along the longitudinal direction of the basin with a constant velocity Wx,
being pos i tive towards the downstream di rect ion. The watershed has a rectangu-
lar shape with a length L and width w. As before, the duration of rainfall i s
T, and the time for the rain to cover the entire watershed is to = L/I wxl The .
velocity of flow on the watershed changes with location and time; but, for sim-
plicity, it is assumed to be a constant equal to U. It must be emphasized here
that this assumption of constant U is only a rough approximation and it should
not be taken too strictly.
For the condition given above, the change of the amount of rain-
fall on the watershed is i (wxl wdt. Since this change of rainfall on the
watershed usually occurs not at the outlet but at some distance upstream, a
certain length of time is required for this water to reach the outlet. If
the duration of the rainfall is longer than a period from t = 0 to
t = /L/U - L/W
X
1, a total volume of rainfall of iAt / 2 will be trans-
0
formed into discharge during this limiting period. The discharge
increases linearly from zero at the beginning until a value of iAto
i s reached at the end of the period, Thus, a redistribution factor
t /I
0
L/U - L/W~s
\ hould be incorporated in the relation of the change
of discharge to the rainfall on the watershed. By applying the rational
formula to each elementary area of the watershed, with the coefficient C
equal to unity for no other losses being considered in this analysis, one
With to = L/I wx( and A = wL, integration of Eq. (4.38) yields
For a semi-infinite duration moving rainstorm starting on the

watershed at the time - t l and moving with a uniform velocity WX ) the
discharge at the outlet is Q = 0 at t = 0 and Q = i A = constant at
t > 1 L/U - L/w~!. Thus, the integration constant C can be evaluated.
By using the singularity function, E q . (4.39) can be written as
For a moving rainstorm of finite duration, the discharge-time

relationship can be obtained from Eq. (4.40) by superposition, as lin-
earity is implicitly implied by the rational formula. Let Q represent
1
t h e d i s c h a r g e from a f i r s t rainstorm which s t a r t s t o f a l l on t h e
watershed a t t = -tl and producing discharge beginning a t t = 0. The
discharge Q from a seclond rainstorm lagged behind t h e f i st ra i n -
2
storm by a time of T i s
Thus, t h e a c t u a l discharge f o r t h e moving rainstorm w i t h a duration T

i s Q = Q, - Q,, or
P 1 L L
iA
=
I-, L L (<t> - <t- I- - - IWx> - <t - T>
From Eq. (4.41), i t i s obvious t h a t i f T < (L/U - L / w ~ / ,t h e peak dis-

charge occurs a t t = T and
P
and i f T > / L/U - L/W

X
1, t h e peak discharge occurs over t h e period
(L/U - L/w~/ < t P < T, and
The terms a t t h e r i g h t of hee equality sign of Eqs. (4.42) and (4.43)

a r e t h e values of C i n Eq. (4.37), and t h e s e terms m u l t i p l i e d by A = w L
would provide t h e v a l u e s of A ' i n Eq. (4.36).
For the special case of T = to = L/I wxl, f u r t h e r discussions
can be given. I f the rainstormmoves upstream, W x < 0 3 then E q . (4.42)
applies, In t h i s case, the dimensionless peak discharge B / i A is always
l e s s than u n i t y and occurs a t
For the case o f rainstorm moving downstream, two p o s s i b i l i t i e s a r i s e . If
L/U > 2L/Wx3 o r W

X
> 2U, a t no time does the e n t i r e watershed c o n t r i b u t e
t o t h e discharge and Eq. (4.42) a p p l i e s w i t h the time t o peak a t
If W
x
4 2U, t h e r e i s a period
during which t h e e n t i r e watershed c o n t r i b u t e s t o the flow a t the o u t l e t

and the peak discharge is equal t o i A a s indicated by Eq. (4.43).
P
CHAPTER 5, EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES
AS d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 3, a t present t h e r e i s no exact theore-

t i c a l method w h i c h can a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t t h e r u n o f f f r o m a w a t e r s h e d due
t o a rainstorm, I n o r d e r t o o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e e f f e c t o f t h e
movement o f r a i n s t o r m s on t h e r u n o f f , e x p e r i m e n t s were p e r f o r m e d i n a
l a b o r a t o r y Watershed Exper i m e n t a t i o n System (WES) a t t h e H y d r a u l ic Eng i-
neering Laboratory o f the University o f I l l i n o i s ,
The maximum s i z e o f t h e b a s i n o f t h e WES i s 40 f t by 40 f t ,
The geometry o f t h e b a s i n , as d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter 2, c o n s i s t e d o f a l o n g i -
t u d i n a l c h a n n e l p o r t i o n and l a t e r a l o v e r l a n d - f l o w r e g i o n s ( ~ i1).
~ .Two
b a s i n shapes were used: a square and an a p p r o x i m a t e t r i a n g l e , The
s u r f a c e o f t h e b a s i n was made t o s l o p e downward towards t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l
p r i n c i p a l a x i s o f t h e square b a s i n . T h i s l a t e r a l slope,
as defined s
y3
i n Chapter 2, was k e p t a t 1% f o r a l l t h e e x p e r i m e n t s performed, The
l o n g i t u d i n a l slope s c o u l d be v a r i e d , One-inch square redwood s t r i p s
x
were n a i l e d t o t h e b a s i n s u r f a c e a l o n g t h e l a t e r a l d i r e c t i o n a t 2 - f t c e n t e r s
apart, e x t e n d i n g 18 f t f r o m b o t h s i d e s o f t h e b a s i n a l o n g t h e y - d i r e c t i o n
towards t h e p r i n c i p a l a x i s , These s t r i p s s e r v e d t o g u i d e t h e f l o w from
t h e s i d e s o f t h e b a s i n a l o n g t h e l a t e r a l d i r e c t i o n towards t h e a x i s o f
symmetry. The f l o w w o u l d t h e n move down t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l s l o p e towards
t h e o u t l e t s e c t i o n o f t h e whole basin, With r e f e r e n c e t o t h e geometric
p a r a m e t e r s i n Fig, 1, t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l b a s i n had B = 4 f t , b = 2 f t , and
L = 40 ft, The s u r f a c e o f t h e b a s i n adopted was t h e rough s i d e o f tempered
m a s s n i t e b o a r d w h i c h was w a t e r p r o o f e d ,
The a r t i f i c i a l r a i n f a l l i n g on t h e l a b o r a t o r y w a t e r s h e d was p r o -
duced by 400 r a i n d r o p p r o d u c e r s , each b e i n g a 2 l x 2 ' x 1-314
'" l u c i t e box
D e t a i l s o f these
l o c a t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 7 f t above t h e b a s i n s u r f a c e .
29
r a i n d r o p p r o d u c e r s a r e d e s c r i b e d by Chow and Harbaugh. Raindrops randomly
produced f r o m 576 p o l y e t h y l e n e t u b e s o f 0.023 in, I.D., 0,047 i n . O.Do, and
3 / 4 i n , l o n g i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e b o t t o m o f each l u c i t e r a i n d r o p p r o d u c e r a r e
o f t h e s i z e o f 0,14 i n . e q u i v a l e n t diameter, spaced a t 1 i n . c e n t e r s .
The e q u i v a l e n t r a i n d r o p d i a m e t e r i s e q u a l t o t h e d i a m e t e r of a sphere
having the same volume of the raindrop, Four raindrop producers form a
module covering an area of 16 sq ft and a r e connected by four 3 / & i n o
I,D, polyethelene tubes t o a common e l e c t r o n i c d i g i t a l valve assembly
(EDVA)
for water supply. Thus, t h e r e a r e one hundred modules over the
e n t i r e basin, each having an EDVA f o r flow r a t e control,
The EDVA has two 4.75 i n . I.D, cylinders of 2.1-in, and 4.l-in.
long, respectively; the former connected by a 3/4Pin, IoDo polyethelene
t u b i n g t o the water supply d i s t r i b u t i o n network and the l a t t e r t o the
raindrop producers w i t h four 42-in. long 3 / & i n Q 1.D. polyethelene tubes,
The cylinders a r e connected by four f i b e r g l a s s tubes w i t h small passages
for flow of dicharges i n the r a t i o s of l:2:4:8. Each passage i s controllel
by a solenoid valve, By e l e c t r o n i c a l l y controlling the opening or closure
of the valves, f i f t e e n d i f f e r e n t i n t e n s i t i e s of r a i n f a l l f o r any desired
duration can b e a t t a i n e d t o cover each 16-sq f t module independently.
Thus, w i t h the t o t a l 100 modules, temporal and s p a t i a l v a r i a t i o n of the
r a i n f a l l can be achieved over an area up t o a maximum of 40' x 40' of
the basin, The constancy of the flow r a t e through the solenoid valves
i s ensured by a constant back pressure of 12 psi a t the upstream end of
the f i b e r g l a s s tubes which i s maintained by a pneumatic control system,
The solenoid valves a r e actuated by e l e c t r i c pulses transmitted
from a PDS 1020 d i g i t a l computer through an e l e c t r o n i c digital-analog
i n t e r f a c e console, By programming the desired sequence of the operation
of t h e solenoid valves for the computer, experiments of various r a i n f a l l
p a t t e r n s on watersheds of d i f f e r e n t s i z e s or shapes w i t h i n the s i z e of
40 f t square, w i t h the limitation of 4 f t stepwise v a r i a t i o n i n the longi-
tudinal and/or l a t e r a l d i r e c t i o n s , can be conducted,
The computer, together w i t h the interface console, i s a l s o used
for data a c q u i s i t i o n purposes, Runoff from the basin i s collected i n a
storage tank of which the depth-volume relationship has been c a l i b r a t e d ,
Two sonars spaced symmetrically 4 f t a p a r t i n t h e ' 8 f t wide 19 i n . long
6
tank, w i t h frequencies of 10 cps, a r e used i n measuring the change of
water depth w i t h time i n the tank. The m i n i m u m variation of depth which
the sonars can detect i s approximately 1/30 i n , or corresponds t o 0,035
cu f t i n volume. I n every five-second cycle two sonar readings a r e taken
a t approximately 50 milliseconds a p a r t , and the signals a r e sent through
the i n t e r f a c e console t o the computer for the runoff-rate computation.
As water i n t h e WES i s r e c i r c u l a t e d by pumping i t from t h e
s t o r a g e tank through a d i s t r i b u t i o n network i n t o t h e EDVABs, t h e r a t e
of flow pumped out from t h e tank i s measured by a Potter t u r b i n e - t y p e
flow meter, The m i n i m u m v a r i a t i o n of flow r a t e which t h e flow meter
-4
can d e t e c t i s 7.5 x 10 cfs, The water being pumped i n t o t h e network
i s measured by t h e flow meter f o r a period of four seconds during each
5-sec d a t a - * a c q u i s i t i o n c y c l e , The f l o w m e t e r s i g n a l i s s e n t t o t h e
computer and t h e average flow r a t e i s then computed, The r e s u l t added
t o t h e r a t e of change o f volume i n t h e s t o r a g e tank obtained from t h e
sonar measurement gives t h e runoff r a t e from t h e basin,
Further d e t a i l s of t h e setup of t h e WES can b e found i n
Refs, 29 and 30,
Experiments of ra instornls of ilni form i n t e n s i t y moving a t con-

s t a n t v e l o c i t y over square and t r i a n g u l a r watersheds were performed i n
t h e WES a s described i n t h e preceding s e c t i o n . The square watershed
had a dimension of 32' x 3 2 ' ( ~ i g ,5 a ) , T h e t r i a n g u l a r watershed was
a c t u a l l y a 4 - f t stepwise approximate i s o s c e l e s t r i a n g l e w i t h i t s apex
p o i n t i n g t o t h e o u t l e t of t h e basin (Fig. 5b). Both watersheds had t h e
same a r e a of 1024 sq f t and were accanmodated w i t h i n t h e 40-ft square
bas i n ,
For each of t h e two watersheds t e s t s were conducted f o r twelve
rainstorm v e l o c i t i e s , two r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t i e s , and four l o n g i t u d i n a l
slopes. Experiments f o r t h e four d i f f e r e n t s l o p e s were t e s t e d during a
period of e i g h t months w i t h a sequence of s x equal t o 1 , 1.75, 2 . 9 , and 0.5
percent, There was an e l a p s e of t h r e e months between t h e time t h e 1%-slope
t e s t s ended and t h e 1,75%slope t e s t s began because of e l e c t r o n i c t r o u b l e
i n t h e computer, After t h i s three-month period of no t e s t s i t was observed
t h a t masonite boards of t h e basin s u r f a c e d e t e r i o r a t e d gradually w i t h time,
and consequently t h e s u r f a c e roughness s l i g h t l y changed. However, because
of t h e time, l a b o r , and c o s t involved i n replacing t h e s u r f a c e m a t e r i a l ,
i t was decided t h a t experiments w i t h 1,75, 2,9, and 0.5 percent s l o p e s
could be conducted w i t h i n t h e s h o r t e s t p o s s i b l e time i n o r d e r t o minimize
t h e e f f e c t of changing s u r f a c e roughness,
For each s l o p e of t h e square watershed, t e s t s were conducted
f o r rainstorms having T/t = 1 and Wx ranged from -0.40 f p s t o 0.40 fps
0
for W = 0 , a n d W = 0 f o r W = 0,10 t o 0,40 f p s , For t h e t r i a n g u l a r
Y x Y
' w a t e r s h e d , experiments w i t h rainstorms having T / t = 1 and Wx ranged
8
from 0 t o 0,40 fps f o r W = 0 were performed, Two r a i n f a l l intensities,

Y
3.5 and 6.7 in./hr, were t e s t e d . A summary of t h e s e experiments i s
l i s t e d i n T a b l e 1,
Before each t e s t was conducted, t h e WES was primed by producing

r a i n f a l l f o r a few minutes i n o r d e r t o wet t h e rnasoni t e s u r f a c e a s well
a s t o guarantee t h a t t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n network and t h e raindrop producers
were f i l l e d w i t h t h e proper amount of water, Immediately a f t e r such
preliminary p r e p a r a t i o n s , a program of t h e d e s i r e d r a i n f a l l p a t t e r n was
fed i n t o t h e d ; g i t a l computer and t h e message was c a r r i e d through t h e
i n t e r f a c e c o n t r o l console and executed i n t h e WES,
The experimental r e s u l t s , including t h e readings of t h e depth
of water i n t h e s t o r a g e t a n k and t h e countings of t h e flow meter, were
a u t o m a t i c a l l y acquired every f i v e seconds by t h e computer and typed o u t s
o r punched on paper t a p e s , f o r f u r t h e r analyses.
Table 1. Summary of the experimental results
A = L' = 1024 sq ft, B/L = 0.125, b / L = 0.0625, S = 0.01

Y
5
gd3/u2 = 3.4 n 10 , ia = 0.015 .
A. Square watershed,
w/L = 1, T/to = T / W / /L = 1
(a) W = 0 , W/i = O
Y Y
2 tri Fig.
-
iL -
i -
t2
I
Wn
S
v CJ -
QL i iA T No.
in./hr fps % lo4 lo 11
Table 1. (Cont'd)
A. Square watershed,
(b) Wx = 0 , Wx/i = 0
W
-?
%
iA
Q
L
tri
-
L
-
t2
T
Fig.
No.
4
lo4 10
Table 1 .' (concluded)

B. Triangular watershed,
w/L = 1.25, T / t o = o . ~ T ( w ( / L= 1
W = 0, W/i=O
Y Y
Fig.
No.
11 x104 x104
in./hr fps % x 10 x 10
CHAPTER 6. DATA ANALYSIS
1 Experimental ~ e s u l t s
The f l o w - m e t e r and two sonar r e a d i n g s a r e r e c o r d e d a t f i v e -

second i n t e r v a l s as d e s c r i b e d i n t h e p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r . W i t h t h e known
r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f t h e meter r e a d i n g w i t h f l o w r a t e and t h e sonar depth
w i t h storage, t h e r a t e o f t h e f l o w pumped i n t o t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n n e t w o r k
and t h e r a t e o f change o f s t o r a g e i n t h e t a n k can be computed. Accord-
ing t o the p r i n c i p l e o f continuity, t h e d i s c h a r g e f r o m t h e watershed a t
any i n s t a n t i s e q u a l t o t h e sum o f these two computed terms a t t h a t
instant. Thus, by use o f t h e PDS 1020 computer, t h e d i s c h a r g e i s corn-
p u t e d as a f u n c t i o n o f t i m e f o r each r u n and p l o t t e d , and a f a i r c u r v e
can b e drawn t h r o u g h t h e computed p o i n t s t o r e p r e s e n t t h e r u n o f f hydro-
graph. For t h e e x p e r i m e n t s , s l i g h t d e v i a t i o n o f t h e computed p o i n t s
from t h e f a i r c u r v e was observed, w h i c h was p r o b a b l y caused by t h e f o l l o w -
i n g i-easons: (1) t h e f l u c t u a t i o n o f t h e w a t e r s u r f a c e i n t h e s t o r a g e
tank, (2) t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e minimum v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e f l o w r a t e and
d e p t h t h a t t h e f l o w meter and t h e sonars can d e t e c t , respectively, and
(3) t h e u n s t e a d i n e s s and p r e s s u r e s u r g e o f t h e f l o w i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n
network, Because t h e e f f e c t o f t h e p r e s s u r e wave o f t h e f l o w i n t h e
d i s t r i b u t i o n n e t w o r k on t h e f l o w r a t e and on t h e w a t e r d e p t h i n t h e t a n k
c a n n o t be a c c u r a t e l y determined, t h e combined e f f e c t o f t h e above-mentioned
t h r e e reasons on t h e accuracy o f t h e computed d i s c h a r g e c a n n o t be p r e c i s e l y
evaluated. However, as t h e g e n e r a l agreement between t h e hydrographs
o b t a i n e d from t e s t s o f i d e n t i c a l geometry and r a i n f a l l c o n d i t i o n s f o r d i f -
f e r e n t o p e r a t i o n sequences i s good, i t i s estimated accordingly that the
accuracy o f t h e d i s c h a r g e c o m p u t a t i o n s h o u l d b e + 8 % o r b e t t e r ,
I t must b e mentioned h e r e t h a t t h e same e x p e r i m e n t a l data have
22 14
been a n a l y z e d d i f f e r e n t l y by Marcus, Marcus, a's w e l l as Harbaugh,
t o o k e v e r y f i v e s u c c e s s i v e r e a d i n g s t o f i t a q u a d r a t i c c u r v e by u s i n g
~ r e s I n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y t h e f a i r c u r v e s were
method.
the l e a ~ t - ~ ~ ~
drawn w i t h o u t p r e d e t e r m i n i n g t h e t y p e o f t h e c u r v e s , t h u s p r o v i d i n g more
reliable results,
With t h e r u n o f f hydrographs o b t a i n e d from t h e f a i r curves
and t h e hyetographs o b t a i n e d from t h e f l o w m e t e r readings, the experi-
mental r e s u l t s were then analyzed i n accordance w i t h Eq, (2.3), which
i s based on t h e dimensional a n a l y s i s , The r e l a t i v e d u r a t i o n o f t h e
r a i n f a l l used i n t h e a n a l y s i s i s expressed as T / t i n s t e a d o f Ti/!-,
0
because, f o r t h e r a i n s t o r m s tested, t h e former i s a c o n s t a n t w h i l e t h e
l a t t e r varies w i t h the i n t e n s i t y o f r a i n f a l l . (T/to = T I w I / L for the
square b a s i n and T / t o = 0.8 TI WI/L f o r t h e t r i a n g u l a r basin.) For
t h e experiments conducted, t h e v a l u e o f w/L i s equal t o u n i t y f o r t h e
square b a s i n and 1,25 f o r t h e t r i a n g u l a r basin, The o t h e r nondimen-
s i o n a l parameters which a r e k e t p c o n s t a n t f o r b o t h b a s i n s are:
The r a i n d r o p c o n c e n t r a t i o n c i s computed as t h e r a t i o o f t h e area o f a

c i r c l e w i t h i t s diameter equal t o t h e e q u i v a l e n t r a i n d r o p diameter, to
t h e average h o r i z o n t a l l y , p r o j e c t e d area on t h e b a s i n s u r f a c e t o r e c e i v e
one r a i n d r o p ( 1 sq in.). Thus, f o r t h e masonite s u r f a c e t e s t e d w i t h t h e
above c o n s t a n t values o f dimensionless parameters, Eq. (2.3) can be
simp1 i f i e d as
With t h e a i d o f Eq. (6.11, experimental data analyzed f o r d i f f e r e n t

slopes, r a i n f a l l intensities, and r a i n s t o r m v e l o c i t i e s a r e shown i n
Figs. 7 t o 38 as nondimensional hydrographs w i t h t h e corresponding hyeto-
graphs. The r e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s a r e summarized i n Table 1,
The rnagni.tude o f peak discharge, $, from t h e watershed, and
t h e t i m e i t occurs, t a r e e v a l u a t e d nondirnensionally from t h e e x p e r i -
p9
mental r e s u l t s and p l o t t e d a g a i n s t r a i n s t o r m v e l o c i t i e s i n Figs. 43 t o 49.
The l e n g t h of time, tr, r e q u i r e d f o r the discharge t o reduce from i t s peak
magnitude t o 8/2 i s adopted as an i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e behavior o f t h e f l o w

recession. Experimental r e s u l t s o f t r a r e p l o t t e d nondimensionally i n
Figs. 39 t o 42.
between t h e maximum r a t e o f r a i n f a l l and
The l e n g t h o f t i m e t
2
t h e peak discharge i s adopted t o i n d i c a t e t h e time r e l a t i o n s h i p between
r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f ( ~ i g 6
. ). The a d o p t i o n o f t 2 i s a s u b s t i t u t i o n f o r
t h e t i m e tl between t h e t i m e t h e f i r s t r a i n d r o p s t o u c h t h e b a s i n and
t h e t i m e o u t f l o w f i r s t occurs. The v a r i a b l e t2 i s used i n p r e f e r e n c e
to t p a r t l y because t h e a c c u r a c y o f l o w d i s c h a r g e measurement i s inade-
1
q u a t e and p a r t l y because t h e r a i n f a l l on t h e b a s i n has a & f t s t e p w i s e
advancement r a t h e r t h a n a c o n t i n u o u s c o n s t a n t v e l o c i t y o f r a i n s t o r m
movement, The e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s u l t s o f t /T as a f u ~ c t i o no f t h e r e l a -
2
t i v e rainstorm v e l o c i t y f o r d i f f e r e n t r a i n f a l l intensities, b a s i n slopes
and shapes a r e shown i n F i g , 50 t o 53,
Fig. 6. Schematic d r a w i n g o f t h e t i m e s i n v o l v e d i n hydrographs
Each o f t h e 101 r u n s t e s t e d i n t h e WES as l i s t e d i n T a b l e 1

can be used t o e v a l u a t e t h e r e s p e c t i v e s t o r a g e c o e f f i c i e n t s K1, K2, and
Kg as d e f i n e d i n E q o (4.3). However, because o f t h e l a r g e amount o f wor
i n v o l v e d i n t h e d a t a c o m p u t a t i o n and because t h e l i n e a r model proposed i
Chapter 4 i s an a p p r o x i m a t i o n , o n l y one r u n i s chosen f o r a n a l y s i s i n
o r d e r t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e t e c h n i q u e o f t h e systems approach.
The arbitrarily chosen run for illustration has a rainstorm
.7
moving downstream with W / i = 1230, sx = O0005, i L / v = 470, i L / ~= ~

x
2
2.6 x 1 0 - ~ ' , and pLi /o = 0.00033. The inflow rate I and outflow rate
Q of the basin at any moment can be taken from the hyetograph and the
hydrograph, respectively. The storage S in the basin at the correspond-
ing time can be computed from the continuity relationship. The S vs. H
and S vs. Q curves can then be plotted (Fig. 541, On the recession part
of the S v s , Q curve where the input has ceased, a best-fit straight
line is drawn, Since in this portion of the S vs, Q curve,
and
values of K
1 and K2 can then be computed for the best-fit line, The
values so obtained for this run are K = 64 sec and K2 = 0.5 cu ft.
1
The coefficient K can be computed by using Eqo (4.1) with the
3
values of K1 and K just obtained. Since I, Q, and S are known for
the period between the time runoff started and the time the input stopped,
the value of K3 at any moment can be evaluated, However, the values of
K computed for different times within this period are not necessarily
3
Identical, and hence the a v e r a g e value of K, for this period is computed
3
and adopted as the coefficient for the system. For the run under con-
sideration this averaged K3 is equal to 38 sec.
With the experimental values of T = to = 160 sec and ti = 120 sec

and the computed values of K1 = 64 sec and K3 = 38 sec, the equations
describing the predicted hydrograph can be derived. From Chapter 4,
Eq. (4.12) yields
for 0.25 3 t/to 2 0; Eq. (4.24) yields

for t/to 2 1.25. T h e computed h y d r o g r a p h by u s i n g t h e a b o v e t h r e e
e q u a t i o n s is p l o t t e d i n F i g . 55. T h e e x p e r i m e n t a l h y d r o g r a p h is a l s o
p l o t t e d on t h e same f i g u r e f o r c o m p a r i s o n .
CHAPTER 7, DISCUSSIONS
The physical phenomenon of surface runoff from a watershed
under moving rainstorms differs from that under stationary rainstorms
by the difference of the temporal and spatial distributions of the
input, and consequently, the difference in the time distribution of the
output. Theoretically, E ~ s . (3.1) and (3.2) or EqsO (3.3), (3.5), and
(3.7) govern the flow in the basin, for either stationary or moving
rainstorms. The movement of the rainstorm is differentiated by the
boundary and initial conditions. Up to present (1968) no sat isfactory
solution has been obtained for the governing equations with appropriate
boundary and initial conditions, F r ~ mthe highly nonlinear nature of
these equations it can hardly be expected that the effect of the move-
ment of rainstorms on surface runoff from a watershed is linear or even
that input and output are related in any simple manner.
Physically, when raindrops start to fall onan originally dry

impervious surface, water starts to accumulate. When the amount of water
is small and the surface tension is dominant, the water may be held
locally without occurrence of flow. However, when the surface tension
can no longer overcome the force of gravity and the momentum input of
raindrops along the slope of the surface, the water w i l l start to flow,
Once water is in motion, resistance to flow will develop. As
discussed in Chapter 3, the flow resistance depends not only on the vis-
cosity of the fluid, the roughness of the land, and the surface tension
between the interfaces involved, but also on the unsteadiness and non-
uniformity of the flow. In other words, the flow at a point is a function
of the instantaneous local Reynolds number R, Weber number W, Froude
number F, the relative roughness, and the past history as well as the
current characteristics of the entire flow field. For an area under rain-
fall, the flow is further complicated by the disturbance due to the raindrops,
Raindrops introduce not only mass but also momentum and energy
inputs into the flow. When a single raindrop falls on an otherwise still
water body, the vertical momentum input i s counterbalanced by the reaction
o f t h e p r e s s u r e on t h e b o t t o m c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e d e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e
water surface, The energy i n p u t o f t h e drop i s absorbed by t h e w a t e r
body and e v e n t u a l l y r e s t o r e d i n two forms: (1) a l a r g e amount o f i t
i s d i s s i p a t e d i n t o h e a t d u r i n g t h e m o t i o n o f t h e f l u i d ts r e - e s t a b l i s h
an e q u i l i b r i u m f r e e surface, and (2) a s m a l l amount o f i t i s s t o r e d i n
t h e w a t e r body as p o t e n t i a l energy due t o t h e s m a l l increment o f t h e
depth. When t h e w a t e r body i s f l o w i n g , i n add! t i o n t o t h e above two
forms o f energy c o n v e r s i o n , a s u b s t a n t i a l amount o f t h e r a i n d r o p energy
may b e c o n v e r t e d i n t o k i n e t i c energy w h i c h a f f e c t s t h e f l o w o f w a t e r .
The impact o f t h e r a i n d r o p s on a f l o w i n g w a t e r body n o t o n l y
c r e a t e s a wave r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e f l o w because o f t h e d e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e
w a t e r s u r f a c e b u t a l s o changes t h e v i s c o u s r e s i s t a n c e as a r e s u l t o f change
o f v e l o c i t y gradient. I f t h e r a i n f a l l were coming down as c o n t i n u o u s j e t s
i n s t e a d o f d i s c r e t e drops, t h e a d d i t i o n a l r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e f l o w w o u l d be
t h a t o f a f l o w passing impinging j e t s . The a d d i t i o n a l r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e
f l o w i s h i g h e r i f t h e v a l u e o f t h e r a t i o o f t h e v e r t i c a l momentum i n p u t
t o t h e momentum i n p u t a l o n g t h e f l o w d i r e c t i o n o f t h e r a i n d r o p s i s g r e a t e r ;
also, i t i n c r e a s e s i f t h e v a l u e o f t h e r a t i o o f t h e f l o w momentum t o t h e
r a i n d r o p momentum decreases. I n o t h e r words, the e f f e c t o f raindrops i s
more i m p o r t a n t i n s h a l l o w w a t e r t h a n i n deep w a t e r . For a g i v e n i n t e n s i t y ,
c o n c e n t r a t i o n , and s i z e o f r a i n d r o p s , t h e deeper t h e depth o f t h e f l o w , the
smaller t h e increase o f resistance. I t s h o u l d a l s o be n o t e d t h a t a l t h o u g h
r a i n d r o p s c r e a t e a d d i t i o n a l energy l o s s to t h e f l o w , they a l s o b r i n g i n
energy,
Moreover, t h e d i s t u r b a n c e o f r a i n d r o p s t o t h e f l o w may i n t r o -
duce t u r b u l e n c e such t h a t t h e v i s c o u s r e s i s t a n c e reduces i f t h e v a l u e o f
t h e Reynolds number o f t h e f l o w i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h , in particular
i f the flow i s otherwise laminar, R e d u c t i o n o f t h e Darcy-Weisbach r e s i s t -
ance c o e f f i c i e n t f due t o change o f f l o w regime have been r e p o r t e d by Yu
and ~ c ~ o and ~ ~and ! 3 r a t e r e 6 On t h e o t h e r hand, a d d i t i o n a l t u r b u l e n c e
w n Woo
i n t h e f l o w due t o r a i n d r o p s i m p l i e s a d d i t i o n a l energy l o s s t o h e a t w i t h i n
the fluid. I f t h e Reynolds number o f t h e f l o w i s s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h such
t h a t w i t h o u t r a i n d r o p s t h e v a l u e o f t h e Darcy-Weisbach f approaches a
constant, t h e a d d i t i o n a l energy l o s s can be i n t e r p r e t a t e d as an i n c r e a s e
o f flow resistance, I n v i e w o f t h e above d i s c u s s i o n , i t i s c l e a r t h a t flows
under r a i n f a l l behave d i f f e r e n t l y f r o m t h o s e w i t h o u t r a i n , even i f
a l l o t h e r f a c t o r s a r e t h e same,
To examine t h e e f f e c t o f t h e movement o f a r a i n s t o r m on
surface runoff, t h e case o f a r a i n s t o r m moving a t a c o n s t a n t v e l o c i t y
i n t h e downstream d i r e c t i o n (W
X
= constant >
0, W = 0) o v e r a s i m p l e
Y
i m p e r v i o u s square w a t e r s h e d as t h a t shown s c h e m a t i c a l l y i n F i g . 5 i s
considered, When t h e r a i n s t o r m f i r s t a r r i v e s a t t h e upstream edge o f
t h e w a t e r s h e d and when t h e s u r f a c e t e n s i o n can no l o n g e r i n h i b i t r u n o f f ,
f l o w w i l l s t a r t w i t h i n t h e watershed, B o t h t h e r a i n s t o r m and t h e f l o w
move downstream, and b o t h t h e t o t a l r a t e o f r a i n f a l l o n t o t h e w a t e r s h e d
1 and t h e f l o w i n c r e a s e w i t h t i m e .
flowmoves over thewatershed,
No m a t t e r how t h e r a i n s t o r m o r t h e
o u t f l o w does n o t b e g i n u n t i l a t l e a s t
1
i
one o f them reaches t h e o u t l e t s e c t i o n , The t i m e r e q u i r e d f o r t h e r a i n -
!
1
s t o r m t o r e a c h t h e o u t l e t o f t h e w a t e r s h e d depends on t h e v e l o c i t y o f
I t h e s t o r m movement, The t i m e r e q u i r e d f o r t h e f i r s t drops o f w a t e r from
: t h e upstream watershed d i v i d e t o a r r i v e a t t h e o u t l e t depends on t h e
i n t e g r a t e d t e m p o r a l and s p a t i a l e f f e c t s o f t h e f l o w i n t h e watershed.
The v e l o c i t y o f t h i s f l o w i s n o t a c o n s t a n t n o r i s i t r e a d i l y a c c e s s i b l e
t o e i t h e r measurement o r t h e o r e t i c a l p r e d i c t i o n .
For a g i v e n w a t e r s h e d under a moving r a i n s t o r m o f c o n s t a n t r a i n -
f a l l intensity having a v e l o c i t y f a s t e r than t h e v e l o c i t y o f surface
flow, t h e r a i n s t o r m a r r i v e s a t t h e o u t l e t o f t h e watershed f i r s t , The
e a r l y r u n o f f f r o m t h e w a t e r s h e d i s t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h e r a i n f a l l . on
t h e downstream a r e a o f t h e watershed, As t h e w a t e r g r a d u a l l y accumulates
from t h e upstream area, t h e r a t e o f r u n o f f increases, I f the duration o f
t h e r a i n f a l l i s i n f i n i t e and t h e b a s i n i s i n v a r i a n t w i t h time, eventually
a steady e q u i l i b r i u m c o n d i t i o n o f f l o w w i l l b e reached, the equilibrium
d i s c h a r g e b e i n g t h e maximum d i scharge.
During t h e e a r l y stage o f t h e rainstorm, raindrops which f a l l
o n t o t h e upstream a r e a may s i m p l y p i l e up as d e t e n t i o n s t o r a g e , Not o n l y
need t h e d e p t h a t t h e upstream boundary o f t h e b a s i n n o t be z e r o a f t e r
t h e r a i n s t o r m moves i n t o t h e watershed, b u t a l s o t h e backwater e f f e c t due
t o r a i n f a l l and f l o w i n t h e downstream a r e a w i l l a f f e c t t h e upstream run-
off i f the flow i s subcritical,
For t h e w a t e r s h e d j u s t discussed, i f the velocity o f the rain-
s t o r m decreases, t h e r u n o f f f r o m t h e b a s i n w i l l b e g i n a t a l a t e r time,
and t h e l a g o f time, tl, between t h e t i m e r a i n f i r s t f a l l s on t h e b a s i n ,
and t h e t i m e r u n o f f s t a r t s , increases. I f t h e movement o f t h e r a i n s t o r m
i s s u f f i c i e n t l y slow, r a i n d r o p s f i r s t f a l l i n g on t h e upstream area o f t h e
w a t e r s h e d w i l l f l o w a c r o s s t h e b a s i n and a r r i v e a t t h e o u t l e t b e f o r e t h e
f r o n t o f t h e r a i n s t o r m reaches t h e r e , I n such a case t h e f r o n t o f t h e
f l o w which o u t r a c e s t h e f r o n t o f t h e r a i n s t o r m i s n o t s u b j e c t t o any
d i r e c t raindrop interferences, Consequently, i f the rainstorm lags behind
the flow considerably, t h e t i m e l a g tl i s approximately a constant.
Furthermore, i f t h e d u r a t i o n o f t h e r a i n s t o r m i s s u f f i c i e n t l y long, the
f l o w w i l l e v e n t u a l l y a t t e n d a steady e q u i l i b r i u m c o n d i t i o n which i s t h e
same as t h a t o f t h e f a s t moving r a i n s t o r m , p r o v i d e d t h e i n t e n s i t i e s a r e
t h e same, However, s i n c e i t t a k e s l o n g e r t i m e f o r a slow moving r a i n s t o r m
t o cover t h e e n t i r e basin, t h e l e n g t h o f t i m e r e q u i r e d from t h e b e g i n n i n g
o f r a i n f a l l t o reach t h e e q u i l i b r i u m d i s c h a r g e i s l o n g e r f o r t h e case o f
a s l o w l y moving r a i n s t o r m t h a n f o r a f a s t one.
The e f f e c t o f t h e r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y o f a moving r a i n s t o r m on
t h e r u n o f f i s n o t as o b v i o u s as t h a t o f i t s v e l o c i t y , As a f i r s t a p p r o x i -
m a t i o n , one can say t h a t f o r a g i v e n watershed and r a i n s t o r m v e l o c i t y , the
h i g h e r t h e r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y t h e f a s t e r t h e f l o w o f w a t e r t o reach t h e
o u t l e t f r o m t h e upstream a r e a , I n o t h e r words, when t h e r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t '
i s e x t r e m e l y low, t h e s u r f a c e may j u s t be b a r e l y w e t t e d by t h e r a i n . The
v a l u e s o f t h e Reynolds and Weber numbers o f t h e f l o w a r e so s m a l l ( i , e e ,
r e s i s t a n c e due t o v i s c o s i t y and s u r f a c e t e n s i o n i s h i g h ) , together w i t h
t h e d i s t u r b a n c e o f t h e r a i n d r o p s on t h e f l o w , t h a t i t takes a long t i m e
f o r t h e w a t e r from t h e upstream area t o a r r i v e a t t h e o u t l e t . I n such
a case t h e t i m e l a g tl depends p r i m a r i l y on t h e v e l o c i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m
b u t independent o f t h e i n t e n s i t y .
However, when t h e r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y increases, t h e f l o w depth
i n c r e a s e s and r e l a t i v e l y , r e s i s t a n c e decreases a s i t was d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r
i n t h i s section. The t i m e i n w h i c h w a t e r f l o w s t o t h e o u t l e t i s o f t h e
same o r d e r o f magnitude as t h a t f o r t h e r a i n s t o r m t o c o v e r t h e e n t i r e
watershed. The t i m e l a g tl depends n o t o n l y on t h e v e l o c i t y o f t h e s t o r m
b u t a l s o on t h e i n t e n s i t y o f t h e r a i n f a l l , I f the r a i n f a l l intensity i s
sufficiently high, water will rush downstream in such a manner that it
outraces considerably the front of the storm, and t will depend prima-
1
rily on the intensity, provided other factors remain unchanged. The
values of the Reynolds number and Weber number of the flow are relatively
high as compared with those of the low intensity case. The high inten-
sity case often associates with a high Froude number and hence offers
more wave resistance to the flow than the low intensity case, However,
for the high intensity case the resistance due to raindrop distrubance
is reduced as the flow front is ahead of the rainstorm and this reduction
in resistance is probably more than compensating for the increase in wave
res istance,
The above discussion is based on the assumption that the dura-

tion of the rainfall is sufficiently long. If the duration of the rainfall
is relatively short in comparison with the time required for the rainstorm
to cover the entire basin, (i.e., the former is of smaller or the same
order of magnitude as the latter), the steady condition, with the equilib-
rium discharge, will not be observed, For a downstream moving rainstorm,
having a relatively short duration of rainfall of a given uniform intensity,
the slower the movement of the rainstorm the more the spreading in time of
the total amount of input, For a given duration and intensity, the total
amount of rain falling onto a watershed is a constant, irrespective of the
velocity of the rainstorm. As a result of this extended time distribution
of the input for a slow moving rainstorm, the flow in t h e b a s i n has small
values of the Reynolds and Weber numbers and a relatively h i g h f l o w resist=
ance. Consequently, more rainfall is stored in the watershed to be released
in a later period. With the extended time distribution of the input and
r e l a t i v e l y h i g h f l o w resistance, it can be expected that the total runoff
time for a slow moving rainstorm is longer than that of a fast one. Moreover,
it is clear that the peak discharge is smaller and occurs later for a slow
moving rainstorm than for a fast one.
For rainstorms with the same velocity and intensity falling on
the same watershed, the one with infinite duration provides the upper bound
of the different runoff hydrographs for different durations. The shorter
the duration of the rainfall the smaller the peak discharge and the earlier
it occurs, and the more deviation of the hydrograph from that of the infinite
d u r a t i o n case, The s h o r t d u r a t i o n i m p l i e s s m a l l t o t a l amount o f r a i n f a l l

o n t o t h e watershed. Nevertheless a t t h e i n i t i a l stage t h e f l o w s a r e
identical, disregarding the differences i n duration o f the r a i n f a l l s ,
Consequently, the discussion o f t given e a r l i e r i n t h i s section i s s t i l l
1
valid,
For a r a i n s t o r m w i t h a f i n i t e d u r a t i o n , t h e length o f time
between t h e c e n t r o i d o f t h e h y e t o g r a p h and t h e t i m e o f o c c u r r e n c e o f
t h e peak d i s c h a r g e , t2, i s an i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e
r a i n f a l l and t h e r u n o f f , The v a l u e o f t approaches z e r o o n l y i f t h e
2
d u r a t i o n approaches i n f i n i t y . For r a i n s t o r m s h a v i n g t h e same d u r a t i o n
and u n i f o r m i n t e n s i t y o f r a i n f a l l , g e n e r a l l y t h e r u n o f f l a g s b e h i n d t h e
c e n t r o i d o f t h e h y e t o g r a p h because i t t a k e s t i m e f o r t h e f l o w t o reach
the outlet, and t 2 i n c r e a s e s s l i g h t l y w i t h t h e v e l o c i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m .
However, one can e x p e c t t h a t f o r a g i v e n d u r a t i o n , t i s not too sensitive
2
t o t h e change o f t h e v e l o c i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m .
Moreover, t h e recession o f t h e o u t f l o w from t h e watershed i s
e x p e c t e d t o depend o n l y i n d i r e c t l y on t h e movement o f t h e r a i n s t o r m ,
I m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f t h e peak d i s c h a r g e , while the r a i n f a l l
ceases o r i s r e t r e a t i n g , t h e r e s i d u a l e f f e c t o f t h e r a i n d r o p s on t h e f l o w
i n t h e watershed i s s t i l l n o t n e g l i g i b l e , For a s l o w moving r a i n s t o r m
t h i s r e s i d u a l e f f e c t would p r o b a b l y l a s t l o n g e r a s t h e r a i n s t o r m r e t r e a t s
slowly. However, a f t e r a s u f f i c i e n t l e n g t h o f t i m e s i n c e t h e r a i n ceases
t h e r u n o f f f r o m t h e watershed depends p r i m a r i l y upon t h e p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r -
i s t i c s o f t h e watershed and t h e amount o f w a t e r s t i l l s t o r e d i n i t b u t n o t
d i r e c t l y on t h e p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e r a i n s t o r m . Therefore, if
t h e v a l u e o f t h e Reynolds number o f t h e f l o w i n a b a s i n i s s u f f i c i e n t l y
h i g h and t h e f l o w i s s u b c r i t i c a l , t h e l e n g t h o f t i m e tr, f o r t h e d i s c h a r g e
t o reduce from i t s peak v a l u e C$ to $%, i s p r a c t i c a l l y independent o f t h e
i n t e n s i t y and d u r a t i o n o f t h e r a i n f a l l and t h e v e l o c i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m
movement, p r o v i d e d t h e magnitude o f t h i s v e l o c i t y i s n o t v e r y low.
The f o r e g o i n g d i s c u s s i o n s a r e based on r a i n s t o r m s moving down-
stream a t a c o n s t a n t v e l o c i t y , (W
X
>
0 and W = 0 ) .
Y
Similar discussions
can be a p p l i e d t o r a i n s t o r m s moving i n o t h e r d i r e c t i o n s . For- i n s t a n c e ,
w i t h r a i n s t o r m s moving upstream (W
X
<
0, and W = 0 ) , r u n o f f f r o m t h e
Y
b a s i n i s e x p e c t e d s h o r t l y a f t e r t h e f i r s t r a i n d r o p s f a l l on t h e b a s i n .
The r i s i n g l i m b o f t h e h y d r o g r a p h would have a more g e n t l e s l o p e and a
l o n g e r t i m e f o r t h e upstream-moving r a i n s t o r m t h a n f o r a c o r r e s p o n d i n g
t
downstream-moving r a i n s t o r m h a v i n g t h e same speed, i n t e n s i t y and d u r a t i o n .
't:
I n o t h e r words, t h e magnitude o f i s s m a l l e r and t
i s longer f o r a
i P
i
I f i n i t e - d u r a t i o n upstream-moving r a i n s t o r m t h a n t h o s e f o r t h e c o r r e s p o n d -
i n g downstream-moving r a i n s t o r m h a v i n g t h e same speed, p r o v i d e d o t h e r

f a c t o r s a r e t h e same, On t h e o t h e r hand, i f the duration o f the r a i n f a l l
i s i n f i n i t y , t h e maximum d i s c h a r g e from a b a s i n a t steady c o n d i t i o n i s
independent o f t h e d i r e c t i o n o f movement o f t h e r a i n s t o r m , although t h e
t i m e t o a c h i e v e 99% o f t h i s maximum d i s c h a r g e i s l o n g e r f o r a n u p s t r e a m -
moving r a i n s t o r m t h a n f o r t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g downstream-moving one, Further-
more, because o f t h e t i m e - s p a c e s p r e a d i n g o f t h e i n p u t , t h e time t is
2
l o n g e r and more s e n s i t i v e t o t h e speed o f t h e r a i n s t o r m f o r t h e upstream-
moving case t h a n f o r t h e downstream-rnovi ng one, The r e f e r e n c e r e c e s s i o n
time, tr, i s e x p e c t e d t o depend even l e s s d i r e c t l y on t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
o f t h e r a i n s t o r m f o r t h e case w i t h W
X
< 0 than f o r W
X
> 0 since t
P
occurs
a t a t i m e c l o s e r t o t h e end o f r a i n f a l l f o r t h e former case.
For r a i n s t o r m s moving l a t e r a l l y , b e f o r e t h e r a i n s t o r m passes
t h e o u t l e t t h e s u r f a c e r u n o f f f r o m t h e w a t e r s h e d appears somewhat s i m i l a r
t o t h a t o f r a i n s t o r m s moving-downstream, However, a f t e r t h e r a i n s t o r m
passes t h e o u t l e t o f t h e watershed, i t s behavior i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f a
r a i n s t o r m moving upstream,
From t h e above c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e movement o f
rainstorms, as w e l l as t h e d u r a t i o n and i n t e n s i t y o f t h e r a i n f a l l , i s one
o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s i n a f f e c t i n g t h e t i m e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s u r f a c e
r u n o f f f r o m a watershed, L a b o r a t o r y e x p e r i m e n t s a r e necessary n o t o n l y t o
g i v e q u a n t i t a t i v e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e e f f e c t s o f movement o f r a i n s t o r m b u t
a l s o t o p r o v i d e v i t a l i n f o r m a t i o n t o v e r i f y m a t h e m a t i c a l models,
Experiments w i t h u n i f o r m l y moving r a i n s t o r m s h a v i n g a r e l a t i v e
d u r a t i o n T / t o = 1 o f u n i f o r m i n t e n s i t y r a i n f a l l were p e r f o r m e d i n t h e WES
i n t h e H y d r a u l i c E n g i n e e r i n g L a b o r a t o r y o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Illi n o i s t o
o b t a i n q u a n t i t a t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n and t o s u p p o r t t h e d i s c u s s i o n s g i v e n i n
the preceding section. The impervious watersheds tested are either a
square or an approximate triangular shape with a certain geometric pattern
( ~ i c j . 5). Two different rainfall intensities, approximately 3.5 and

2
6.7 in./hr, were tested. The values of iL/v, p ~ i 2 /o and i /gL were
respectively 235, 0.8 x 10
- 4 and 0.65 x 10-l1 for 3.5 in./hr rainfall,
and 450, 3 x and 2.3 x for 6.7 in./hr rainfall. Accordingly,
for each rainfall intensity tested, Eq. (6.1) gives
The experimental results of the relative discharge, WiA, as a

function of the relative time, t/f, are presented in Figs. 7 to 38 for
different values of sx and W/i, Figures 7 to 30 exhibit dimensionless
hydrographs of the surface runoff from a square watershed. Figures 7 to
14 are for rainstorms moving in the upstream direction, Figs, 15 to 22
for downstream-moving rainstorms, and Figs, 23 to 30 for laterally-moving
rainstorms. Figures 31 to 38 are for the approximate triangular watershed
with the rainstorms moving downstream across the watershed,
As shown in Figs. 7 to 38, all the experimental hydrographs
have a simple shape consisting of a rising portion and a recession portion.
The length of time of recession is much longer than that of the rising
portion, irrespective to the velocity of the rainstorm. This is obviously
due to the effect of the detention storage in the watershed, which can be
considered analogous to emptying a tank of water through an orifice in its
bottom. As the storage decreases, the driving force for the recession
decreases and the relative res i stance to the flow increases. Theoretically
the time required to empty completely the storage of water in the watershed
is infinite.
However, the characteristics of the dimensionless hydrographs
actually vary not only with the relative velocity, W / i , of the rainstorms,
but also with the longitudinal slope of the watershed, s
x
. In referring
to the discussion given in the preceding section, t:?e physical reasonings
for the variation of the relative runoff with W / i is obvious. The peak
d i s c h a r g e and t h e time of i t s occurrence, and t h e lag time between the
r a i n f a l l and runoff, t w i l l be discussed i n t h e following two s e c t i o n s .
2,
Hence, only t h e g e n e r a l shape and t h e recession p o r t i o n of t h e hydrographs
a r e d i s c u s s e d here.
To i l l u s t r a t e c l e a r l y t h e experimental r e s u l t of t h e e f f e c t of
movement of rainstorms on hydrographs, t h e r e l a t i v e discharge Q / i A of 11
runs a r e r e p l o t t e d a g a i n s t t/T i n Figs. 56 t o 58. In each of t h e s e
f i g u r e s , t h e s l o p e of t h e watershed sx i s kept c o n s t a n t . Although t h e
a c t u a l t o t a l amounts of r a i n f a l l a r e unequal f o r rainstorms w i t h d i f f e r e n t
v e l o c i t i e s , t h e a r e a s under t h e dimensionless hyetographs and hydrographs
i n t h e f i g u r e s a r e t h e same and equal t o u n i t y . Thus, from Figs. 56 t o 58
i t can be seen t h a t f o r a given watershed i f t h e magnitude of t h e v e l o c i t y
of t h e rainstorm i n c r e a s e s , t h e s u r f a c e runoff w i l l spread more evenly
over a longer time w i t h a small r e l a t i v e peak discharge occurring a t a
r e l a t i v e l y l a t e r time. This r e s u l t i s i n f u l l agreement w i t h t h e physical
d i s c u s s i o n s given i n t h e preceding s e c t i o n . Furthermore, comparison
between Figs. 56 and 57 shows t h a t t h i s trend of t h e e f f e c t of t h e rain-
storm v e l o c i t y i s more pronounced f o r steep basin s l o p e s , s
X
.
The e f f e c t of sx on runoff can be observed by examining Eq. (3.3).
W i t h a s t e e p basin s l o p e t h e r e i s a l a r g e driving f o r c e due t o g r a v i t y t o
p u l l t h e water down slope. Consequently, t h e v e l o c i t y of t h e flow i n t h e
watershed tends t o be g r e a t e r f o r a l a r g e r s _ . The runoff from t h e s u r f a c e
,
\
thus c o n c e n t r a t e s i n a r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t period of time w i t h a r e l a t i v e l y

high but e a r l y peak discharge. In a d d i t i o n , f o r shallow water flow an
i n c r e a s e of R due t o f a s t v e l o c i t y o f t e n ' i m p l i e s a decrease i n t h e Darcy-
Weisbach's r e s i s t a n c e c o e f f i c i e n t f . Each of Figs. 7 t o 38 v e r i f i e s t h i s
e f f e c t of s X on s u r f a c e runoff. The hydrogrpahs f o r a steep s l o p e sx
have a sharp r i s e , high peak and r e l a t i v e s h o r t time base while those f o r
small s a r e f l a t w i t h a long time base. In each of t h e s e f i g u r e s , s i n c e
X
t h e duration and i n t e n s i t y of r a i n f a l l a r e both kept c o n s t a n t , t h e a c t u a l
t o t a l amount of r a i n f a l l e n t e r i n g t h e watershed system i s t h e same f o r
curves i n t h e same f i g u r e . Again, t h e a r e a s under t h e hyetographs o r hydro-
graphs a r e each equal t o unity. Examination of t h e s e f i g u r e s a l s o reveals
t h a t t h e longer t h e duration o r the more t h e a c t u a l t o t a l volume of r a i n f a l l
e n t e r i n g t h e watershed, r e l a t i v e l y t h e smaller the e f f e c t of s on t h e
X
,
v a r i a t i o n o f time d i s t r i b u t i o n o f runoff. I t must be n o t e d h e r e t h a t t h e I
experimental r e s u l t s o f t e s t s w i t h s = 0.01 do n o t a g r e e w i t h t h e g e n e r a l I
X
t r e n d j u s t mentioned. T h i s i s b e l i e v e d t o be m a i n l y due t o t h e change o f
s u r f a c e roughness w i t h t i m e caused by t h e d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f t h e rnassnite s u r - :
f a c e as m e n t i o n e d i n Chapter 5. T e s t s o f 1% s l o p e were p e r f o r m e d a t l e a s t
1
t h r e e months e a r l i e r w i t h a smoother s u r f a c e , than those o f o t h e r slopes,

I n t h e experiments w i t h T / t
o
= 1, where to = L/I WI f o r t h e square i
I
w a t e r s h e d a n t to = 1.25 L / / W\ f o r the a p p r o x i m a t e t r i a n g u l a r watershed, the

v a l u e o f t i / L d i f f e r s f r o m t h a t o f t / T o n l y by a c o n s t a n t . Thus, hydro-
graphs o f Q / i A vs. t i / L w o u l d have t h e same shape and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as
t h o s e o f Q / i A vs. t/T i n each o f F i g s . 7 t o 38, e x c e p t t h a t t h e a b s c i s s a 1
(
s c a l e s h o u l d be d i v i d e d by 1w i f o r t h e square w a t e r s h e d and 0.8 I W! / i I

I
f o r t h e t r i a n g u l a r watershed. However, t h e a r e a under a h y e t o g r a p h o r a T
h y d r o g r a p h u s i n g t i / L as t h e t i m e s c a l e i s no l o n g e r e q u a l t o u n i t y .
1!
From d i m e n s i o n a l a n a l y s i s i t has been p r e d i c t e d t h a t t h e i n t e n - I
s i t y o f r a i n f a l l has no d i r e c t e f f e c t on t h e change o f f l o w c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 1
a s l o n g as W / i , R , and o t h e r d i m e n s i o n l e s s parameters a r e k e p t c o n s t a n t . i,
However, a s mentioned i n Chapter 2, it i s d i f f i c u l t t o define a physically
i
s i g n i f i c a n t Reynolds number as w e l l a s t h e Froude number o r t h e Weber number, i
f o r t h e e n t i r e watershed over t h e e n t i r e r u n o f f p e r i o d . These numbers a r e

1
a f f e c t e d n o t o n l y by t h e u n s t e a d i n e s s and n o n u n i f o r m i t y o f t h e f l o w i n t h e
watershed, b u t a l s o by t h e d i s t u r b a n c e caused by t h e r a i n d r o p s e 6 I n o r d e r
t o show t h e e f f e c t o f R , comparisons between F i g s . 8 and 9, 11 and 12, 16
and 17, 19 and 20, 2 4 and 25, 27 and 28, 32 and 33, and 35 and 36 a r e made.
For each p a i r o f t h e s e f i g u r e s , t h e values o f W / i a r e t h e same b u t t h e v a l u e s
o f iL/v a r e d i f f e r e n t . The l a t t e r parameter i s presumably an i n d i c a t i o n o f
t h e Reynolds number. I t i s c l e a r f r o m t h e comparison between t h e s e s e t s o f
I
I
f i g u r e s t h a t t h e Reynolds number has an i m p o r t a n t e f f e c t on t h e t i m e d i s t r i - 1
,
b u t i o n o f t h e r u n o f f f r o m t h e watershed. This sensitive e f f e c t o f the I
;
Reynolds number i s o b v i o u s s i n c e s u r f a c e f l o w s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the overland
portion, u s u a l l y have l o w R as t h e depths a r e s m a l l . For f l o w s o f l o w
Reynolds number a s m a l l i n c r e a s e i n R o f t e n r e s u l t s i n a c o n s i d e r a b l e de- L
crease i n f e I n t h e p r e s e n t study w i t h t h e d u r a t i o n T = L/I WI f o r a square

w a t e r s h e d and T = 1.25 L/I WI f o r t h e t r i a n g u l a r watershed, a c o n s t a n t v a l u e
of / W/ / i i m p l i e s t h a t t h e t o t a l amount o f r a i n f a l l o n t o t h e watershed i s
I
a l s o a constant. Thus, a small value o f (wI implies a long duration. In

I
o t h e r words, t h e same amount o f w a t e r i s d i s t r i b u t e d on t h e same area
o v e r a l o n g e r p e r i o d , and hence t h e f l o w i n t h e watershed has a s m a l l e r
depth and v e l o c i t y than those w i t h a l a r g e / WI . Experimental r e s u l t s
c o n f ir m t h a t f o r a given 1w / t h e s m a l l e r t h e i , and presumably t h e
smaller the R, t h e h i g h e r t h e r e l a t i v e r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e f l o w and t h e
w i d e r t h e spreading o f t h e s u r f a c e r u n o f f w i t h time, I n a sense, the
e f f e c t o f an i n c r e a s e i n lR i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f i n c r e a s i n g sx, as b o t h
a r e d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o t h e balance o f t h e d r i v i n g f o r c e and t h e r e s i s t -
ance t o t h e f l o w .
The b a s i n slope, t h e Reynolds number, and t h e Froude number
a r e t h e major f a c t o r s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e gross hydrodynamic e f f e c t on
t h e f l o w i n t h e watershed i n d i r e c t response t o t h e r e s i s t a n c e f o r c e s
and t h e d r i v i n g f o r c e s . Hence a h y p o t h e s i s can be made t h a t these f a c t o r s
a f f e c t Q i n t h e same unique manner as they a f f e c t Q
P
. The r e l a t i v e v e l o c -
i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m movement, W / i , which d e s c r i b e s t h e temporal and spa-
t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f the input, i s n o t considered d i r e c t l y i n t h e flow
resistance, Then a t l e a s t up t o t h e t i m e a t which t h e peak d i s c h a r g e
occurs, Eqs. (2.3) and (2.4) can be combined t o g i v e
I n o r d e r t o v e r i f y t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h i s hypothesis, experimental
hydrographs f o r W i i = 1200, id i i = 0, w i t h s r a n g i n g from 0.005 t o 0,029,
x Y x
f o r iL/v equal t o 240 and 450, r e s p e c t i v e l y , a r e p l o t t e d i n F i g s . 59 and
60. I t can be seen from these two f i g u r e s t h a t , as a f i r s t a p p r o x i m a t i o n
w i t h an allowance o f 2 5 % v a r i a t i o n , Eq. (7.2) i s v a l i d w i t h i n t h e range o f
magnitude o f t h e parameters t e s t e d , T h i s c o n c l u s i o n i s o f no s u r p r i s e i f
one r e a l i z e s t h a t by p u t t i n g W / i = 0, Eq. (7.2) becomes one o f t h e non-
dimensional forms o f t h e u n i t hydrograph.
However, a c a r e f u l comparison between F i g s . 59 and 60 r e v e a l s
t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e hydrographs a r e small, they a r e
systematic. With more p r e c i s i o n one can say t h a t t h e hydrographs o f Q/-
'b
VS. t/t spread more w i d e l y over t h e t i m e f o r s m a l l e r values o f iL/v o r
P
s than for larger values of those two parameters, This trend is con-
x
sistent with the aforementioned physical explanation, Flows with small
values of iL/v or sx have a high relative resistance. Again, by referring
to the case of W/i = 0, this conclusion is of no surprise. It has long

been known that the response of a watershed producing runoff from a sta-
tionary rainstorm is nonlinear,
The similarity in the recession portions of the hydrographs in
Figs, 59 and 60 suggests that the recession curves are similar in nature
and not sensitive to the velocity of the rainstorm movement, or W / i . In
other words, when plotting Q/$ against (t-t )/t,, the recession curves
P
for various rainstorms should be the same, Presumably this is particu-
larly true if the peak discharge occurs after the r a i n ceases. Slight
deviation may be caused by the retreating rainfall into the watershed
extending beyond the time when C$ occurs. Instead of plotting experimental
results as Q/ v s (t-tp)/tr to verify this suggestion directly, Figs. 39
to 42 can be used to show the variation of W/i vs. tri/L for discussion^
The major reason for this alternative approach is that the low discharge
measurement during the later period of the recession is inadequate in
accuracy for the first suggested approach.
It can be seen from Figs, 39 to 4i that for the ranges of the
parameters and for each of the three directions of the rainstorm movement
tested, the logarithemic plot of W / i vs, tr i
/ L is a straight line. In other
words,
in which c is a constant and m is an exponent. Since the experimental
values of m are slightly less than unity, tr should depend on both W and
i ; yet as an approximation it depends heavily on the duration (which is

equal to L/( w/) but insensitively on either the rainstorm velocity or
the rainfall intensity, Thus, the suggestion made in the preceding para-
graph is verified. The value of m is greater for rainstorms moving down-
stream than for upstream-moving rainstorms, This is primarily due to the
deeper depth of the flow and hence relatively smaller raindrop-impact
effects for the former case than for the latter case.
The discussion given in this section is based mostly m the
experimental results obtained from the square watershed. The same
discussion holds for the triangular watershed tested. Comparison of
the corresponding figures of the experimental results for the triangular
watershed verifies this conclusion.
The magnitude and the time of occurrence of the peak discharge

due to a rainstorm are of engineering interest and importance. Experi-
mental results of the relative peak discharge, s / i A , as a function of
W/i for rainstorms with T/to = 1, are shown i n Figs. 43 to 45. It can
be seen from these figures that the relative discharge decreases with
increasing magnitude of the relative velocity, 1w i of the moving
rainstorm. T h i s is primarily due to the duration of the rainfall. With
T/to = 1, a slow moving rainstorm means a long duration and hence a large
amount of total rainfall. Consequer-ttly,not only a large amount of water
over a relative long time is available to produce the peak discharge but
also the flow resistance is relatively small as discussed in the preceding
two sections, Should the duration of the rainfall and consequently the
total amount of water kept constant the trend would be reversed, such that
increasing / ~ \ / w
i ould imply increasing $/ iA.
For a given W/i and sx, it can be seen from Figs. 43 and 44 that
with T/to = 1, Q /iA decreases with increasing iL/v. In no way should this
P
be interpretated to mean that peak discharge decreases with increasing
magnitude of the Reynolds number of the flow. Since for an increase in i ,
iL/v increases more rapidly than the decrease of %/;A, therefore an in-
crease in il/v actually associates with an increase of peak discharge,
$, provided other independent variables remain unchanged.
Figures 43 and 44 also show that for given W/i and iL/v, $/iA
increases with increasing s
x
.
The physical reasoning for this is obvious.
A steeper basin slope implies greater gravity force to transport whatever
is input into the basin system to its outlet. This is clearly shown by
the body-force term in Eqs. (3.1) or (3.3). For given ~ / iand iL/v, with
T/to = 1, the total amount of input is a constant. With a greater gravity
force, t h e g i v e n amount o f i n p u t i s t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o o u t p u t b e i n g
d i s t r i b u t e d i n a r e l a t i v e shorter period; hence a l a r g e r S/iA is
expected,
Finally, f o r given s
x3
I
iL/v, and W / / i , t h e magnitude o f
$/iA v a r i e s w i t h t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e r a i n s t o r m movement. Compar-
i s o n o f F i g s . 43 and 44 shows t h a t w i t h T / t o = l9t h e corresponding
magnitudes o f
B' i A a r e l a r g e r f o r r a i n s t o r m s moving downstream
( w > ~ 0, W = 0) than f o r r a i n s t o r m s moving upstream ( W < C , W = o),

Y x Y
a n d a r e between t h e two cases f o r l a t e r a l l y - m o v i n g r a i n s t o r m s ( W = 0 ) .
X
T h i s i s c l e a r l y due t o t h e a c c u m u l a t i n g e f f e c t o f t h e r a i n f a l l on t h e
f l o w f o r t h e downstream-moving case where t h e r a i n s t o r m and t h e f l o w
b o t h move i n t h e same d i r e c t i o n , and a l s o due t o t h e time-space spread-
i n g e f f e c t o f t h e water f o r t h e upstream-moving case.
Experimental r e s u l t s o f t i / L as a f u n c t i o n o f W / i f o r r a i n -
P
s t o r m s h a v i n g T / t o = 1 a r e p l o t t e d on l o g a r i t h e m i c s c a l e s as shown i n
F i g s . 46 t o 49. I t can b e seen from each o f t h e s e f i g u r e s t h a t t h e
e x p e r i m e n t a l data f a l l c l o s e t o a s t r a i g h t l i n e w i t h a s l o p e e q u a l t o
-1. Thus,
I n o t h e r words, t h e t i m e a t which peak d i s c h a r g e o c c u r s i s d i r e c t l y p r o -

p o r t i o n a l t o t h e d u r a t i o n o f r a i n f a l l which i s equal t o the t i m e r e q u i r e d
f o r t h e r a i n s t o r m t o t r a v e l a c r o s s t h e watershed, b u t i t i s independent
o f e i t h e r the r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y o r the slope o f the basin, With reference
t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n made i n S e c t i o n 7-1, t h i s r e s u l t appears t o b e s u r p r i s i n g ,
Thus, f u r t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n i s needed.
For r a i n s t o r m s h a v i n g T / t = I as t h ~ s ei n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , the
0
t o t a l amount o f r a i n f a l l i s e q u a l t o AiT, o r ~ i l W
/ \ / f o r t h e square watershed
a n d 1.25 A I L / ! W \ f o r t h e ep-proximate t r i a n g u l a r watershed. Hence. f o r rain-
storms h a v i n g a g i v e n i o v e r a g i v e n watershed, b o t h t h e d u r a t i o n and t o t a l
volume o f r a i n f a l l i n c r e a s e w i t h d e c r e a s i n g r a i n s t o r m speed. Thus, t
P
i s l o n g e r f o r a s l o w moving r a i n s t o r m t h a n f o r a f a s t one, as e x p r e s s e d
i n Eq. (7.5). Such a t r e n d o f i n c r e a s e o f tw i t h d u r a t i o n has a l s o been

P
observed by ~ a r b a u c ~ fhol r~ s t a t i o n a r y r a i n s t o r m s .
Actually, t h e t i m e o f o c c u r r e n c e o f peak d i s c h a r g e i s a f f e c t e d
i n d i r e c t l y by i and s as t i s a f u n c t i o n o f t h e r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e f l o w
x P
i n t h e w a t e r s h e d as d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 7-1. For t h e ranges o f s i / g L ,
x'
and iL/'v a n d For a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g ranges o f R and roughness
t e s t e d i n t h e p r e s e n t study, t h e e f f e c t o f change o f s l o p e o r i on t is
P
n e g l ig i b l e ,
Moreover, f o r a shallow-water f l o w i n a b a s i n as t h o s e e x p e r i -
mented i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y where t h e d e p t h o f f l o w was 1 i n , o r l e s s ,
one m a j o r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e r e s i s t a n c e o f t h e f l o w d u r i n g t h e r a i n i n g
period i s from the raindrops, The r a i n d r o p e f f e c t i s so l a r g e t h a t f o r
a r e l a t i v e l y f l a t b a s i n t h e energy g r a d i e n t o f t h e f l o w i s much g r e a t e r
t h a n t h e b a s i n s l o p e and hence t h e e f f e c t o f t h e b a s i n s l o p e on t h e t i m e
d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e r u n o f f becomes i n s i g n i f i c a n t , although the r e l a t i v e
discharge, %/ iA,
increases w i t h i n c r e a s i n g s ,
x
The e f f e c t o f r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y on t h e s u r f a c e f l o w i s by i t s e l f
o f a compensating n a t u r e . A l t h o u g h h i g h i n t e n s i t y i m p l i e s l a r g e impact and
momentum t r a n s f e r o f r a i n d r o p s , c o n s e q u e n t l y c r e a t i n g a d d i t i o n a l f l o w r e s i s t -
ance, i t aise I m p l f z s l a r g e depth and h i g h R e y n ~ l d snumber cf t h e flow I n
the basin, hence d e c r e a s i n g v i s c o u s r e s i s t a n c e , As a r e s u l t o f t h i s com-
pensation, t h e o c c u r r e n c e t i m e o f peak d i s c h a r g e i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y independ-
ent o f the r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y .
Another puzzle o f the experimental r e s u l t s i s t h a t t h e value o f
c i n Eq. (7.5) i s n o t o n l y a f u n c t i o n o f t h e shape o f watershed b u t a l s o
a f u n c t i o n o f t h e d i r e c t i o n o f r a i n s t o r m movement. More d a t a o v e r a w i d e r
range a r e needed t o d e t e r m i n e whether t h e l a t t e r dependency i s a c t u a l l y
due t o t h e combined e f f e c t s f t h e d u r a t i o n , intensity, slope o f basin,
and o t h e r f a c t o r s . Nevertheless, i n general, the experimental r e s u l t s
a g r e e w e l l w i t h the q u a l i t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n made i n S e c t i o n 7-1 t h a t t h e
movement o f r a i n s t o r m s i s an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r a f f e c t i n g t h e magnitude and
t h e t i m e o f o c c u r r e n c e o f t h e peak d i s c h a r g e .
7-4. Lag o f Time Between R a i n f a l l and R u n o f f
As t i m e i s needed i n t r a n s f o r m i n g r a i n f a l l i n t o s u r f a c e f l o w
and t h e n t o r u n o f f a t t h e o u t l e t o f a watershed, t h e r e i s always a t i m e
l a g between t h e r a i n f a l l and t h e r u n o f f , A study sf t h e time l a g o f
t h e i n d i v i d a u l r a i n d r o p s from t h e moment t h e y t o u c h t h e b a s i n s u r f a c e
t o t h e t i m e t h e y reach t h e o u t l e t i s i m p r a c t i c a b l e , i f n o t impossible.
Hence, a c e r t a i n t i m e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e t o t a l r a i n f a l l and t h e
t o t a l r u n o f f i s u s u a l l y adopted as a measure o f t h e t i m e l a g f o r t h e
watershed.
C o n v e n t i o n a l l y , s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f t i m e l a g have been
used; including, (1) t h e t i m e between t h e maximum r a t e s o f r a i n f a l l and
runoff, (2) t h e t i m e between t h e c e n t r o i d s o f t h e h y e t o g r a p h and hydro-
graph, (3) t h e t i m e between t h e maximum r a t e o f r a i n f a l l and t h e c e n t r o i d
o f t h e hydrograph, and (4) t h e t i m e between t h e c e n t r o i d o f t h e h y e t o g r a p h
and t h e peak d i s c h a r g e . As a m a t t e r o f convenience t h e f i r s t d e f i n i t i o n i s
a d o p t e d i n t h i s s t u d y and i s expressed as t 2 . For t h e moving r a i n s t o r m s
considered i n the present study, t h e magnitude o f t h e t i m e l a g based on
(1) i s t h e same a s t h a t o f (4) f o r t h e square w a t e r s h e d t e s t e d .
There i s a c t u a l l y a n o t h e r p h y s i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t t i m e l a g between
r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f . This i s t h e time lag, tl, between t h e i n s t a n t t h e
f i r s t r a i n d r o p s t o u c h t h e b a s i n s u r f a c e and t h e moment r u n o f f s t a r t s a t
t h e o u t l e t o f t h e watershed. As d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 6, because o f inade-
q u a t e a c c u r a c y o f low d i s c h a r g e measurement, t h e use o f t 2 i s p r e f e r r e d t o
tl i n t h e present study.
E x p e r i m e n t a l r e s u l t s p l o t t e d as W / i v s . t 2 / T on l o g a r i t h e m i c
s c a l e s ( ~ i ~ 50
s . t o 53) show t h a t t h e d a t a f a l l c l o s e t o s t r a i g h t l i n e s
w i t h s l o p e s e q u a l t o -1. Thus
I n t h e p r e s e n t study, T =
to
= L / \ W( , therefore
where c i s a c o n s t a n t depending p r i m a r i l y on sx. With increasing s
x
t h e v a l u e o f c increases. Hence, the steeper t h e b a s i n slope t h e s h o r t e r
t h e l a g time, T h i s i s o b v i o u s by r e f e r r i n g t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n s i n Chapter 3
and S e c t i o n 7-1, Steep s l o p e means l a r g e f o r c e due t o g r a v i t y a c t i n g on
the f h and s m a l l s t o r a g e i n t h e watershed, Therefore, the lag time t
2'
as w e l l a s t i s expected t o be small, Should s approach i n f i n i t y ,

1' X
woul d a p p r o a c h z e r o ,
E q u a t i o n (7.7) i m p l i e s t h a t as a f i r s t approximation, within
t h e ranges o f t h e p a r a m e t e r s t e s t e d f o r each d i r e c t i o n o f movement o f
rainstorms o v e r a g i v e n basin, the time lag t depends o n l y on t h e i n t e n -
2
s i t y o f the rainfall, I f t h e e x p e r i m e n t s were s u f f i c i e n t l y a c c u r a t e , a
p l o t o f t 2 i / L vs, sx w o u l d a p p r o x i m a t e l y g i v e a s i n g l e c u r v e independent
o f t h e speed o f t h e moving r a i n s t o r m s . I f t h e t i m e l a g were t r u l y inde-
pendent o f W, p l o t s o f I WI/ i vs. t 2 / T would o v e r l a p f o r rainstorms o f
d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n s o f movement w i t h t h e same c o n s t a n t s
x
.
Comparison
among F i g s . 50 t o 52 r e v e a l s t h a t t h i s i s n o t t h e case. Value o f t h e
c o e f f i c i e n t c i s s l i g h t l y h i g h e r f o r t h e upstream-moving r a i n s t o r m case
(wx < 0) t h a n f o r t h e downstream-moving case (wx > 0), w i t h the value o f
c i n between f o r t h e l a t e r a l l y - m o v i n g r a i n s t o r m s .
T h i s l a c k o f s e n s i t i v i t y o f t h e l a g time i n r e l a t i o n t o the
v e l o c i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m i s p r i m a r i l y due t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e l a g t i m e
i s a r e s u l t o f t h e s t o r a g e e f f e c t e f t h e i n p u t i n t o t h e wstershed system.
The e f f e c t o f t h e movement o f r a i n s t o r m s on t h e h y e t o g r a p h i s s i m i l a r t o
t h a t on t h e h y d r o g r a p h i n t h a t a p r o l o n g e d slow r a i n s t o r m d e l a y s b o t h t h e
c e n t r o i d o f t h e h y e t o g r a p h and t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f t h e peak d i s c h a r g e , As
a result, t2 i s n o t s e n s i t i v e t o the v e l o c i t y o f the rainstorms.
One i n t e r e s t i n g f e a t u r e i s a comparison o f hydrographs produced

by moving r a i n s t o r m s w i t h t h o s e o f t h e e q u i v a l e n t s t a t i o n a r y r a i n s t o r m s .
The e q u i v a l e n t s t a t i o n a r y r a i n s t o r m is d e f i n e d as a r a i n s t o r m which has
t h e same d u r a t i o n and i n t e n s i t y o f r a i n f a l l as t h a t o f t h e moving r a i n -
storm b u t t h e r a i n i s f a l l i n g s i m u l t a n e o u s l y o v e r t h e e n t i r e watershed.
In other words, for the moving rainstorms tested in the present study
the watershed as a whole actually receive a rainfall lasting for a
length of time 2T while their equivalent rainstorms have a duration
T, although the duration of rainfall at any point in the watershed is ti
the same for both cases and the total amount of rainfall onto the water-
$
shed is also the same.
a
r:
8
Experimental results of Q / i A vs. t/T for ra instorms having
e4
-4i
identical conditions of T/to = 1, s, = 0.0175, iL/v = 440, T I / L = 11 x 10 d
and l ~ I / i = 880 but moving at three different directions: upstream, down- 1
1
stream, and laterally, are plotted in Fig. 61 together with the hydrograph
of the equivalent stationary rainstorm. Figures 62 to 64 are similar plots i
-4
for T/to = 1, iL/v = 450, Ti/L = 3.8 x 10 , l ~ l / i= 2500 and three dif-
ferent basin slopes: 0.005, 0.0175 and 0.029.
As shown in Figs. 61 to 64, the equivalent stationary rainstorm
gives a higher peak discharge than those of the corresponding moving rain-
storms. The time of occurrence of the peak discharge is also earlier for
the equivalent stationary rainstorm than for storms moving either upstream
or laterally. In referring to the time when the raindrops first reach the
surface, the relative time of occurrence of peak discharge, (tl + t )/T,
P
is smaller for the equivalent stationary rainstorm than for any moving
rainstorm, This conclusion is not only interesting but also of pract ical
importance. This is attributed to the different time distribution o f the
amount of input and consequently the difference in characteristics of the
flow on the watershed.. The storage in the watershed after the rainfall
started is built up more rapidly for the stationary rainstorm than for the
corresponding moving ra i nstorms. The movement of a ra instorm tends to
spread out not only the time distribution of a given amount of input but
also the length of time of disturbance caused by the raindrops, and hence
indi rectly increases the total resistance to the flow over the period of
runoff.
It should be mentioned here that ~aksimov,~'using the rational

formula, erroneouslycomparing a stationary rainstorm to a uniformly moving
rainstorm of different duration and intensity, (hence different total amount
of rainfall), arrives at a misleading result which can be expressed as
Qp/iA = 1 for both rainstorms.
Finally, it must be noted here that for rainstorms with non-
uniform velocity and intensity it is possible that the magnitude of the
relative peak discharge, s/iA, may be greater and the relative time of
occurrence, t /T, may be earlier for the moving rainstorm than for its
P
equivalent stationary storm.
A method to predict the surface runoff produced by a moving

rainstorm based on the systems appreach has been discussed in Chapter 4.
The key feature of this approach is the evaluation of the coefficients
relating the rainfall and runoff to the storage in the watershed, The
phys ical character i it ics of the watershed and partly the hydrometeor-
logical characteristic of the rainfall are implicitly assumed to be
reflected by the values of the coefficients K1, K2, and Kg. These
coefficients would vary not only from watershed to watershed but also
with different rainstorms, By comparing the expressions of the relative
discharge Q / i A obtained in Chapter 4 with Eq. (2.31, it is clear that the
c o e f f i c i e n t s would n o t be simple functions of t h e physical characteristics
of the watershed and rainstorm involved. A full representation by the
systems approach of a given watershed would require a complete evaluation
o f the sets of values of K's for different characteristics of rainfall, and
perhaps also for seasonal variation of the surface coverage. Such a thorough
evaluation would not only require a large amount of data but also defeats
the original purpose of a simple prediction method.
One experimental run i n t h e square watershed w i t h W / i = 1230,
X
S_ =
A
0.005, and iL/v = 470 was analyzed as described in Section 6-2 as
an example. Values of K K2, and K were evaluated and the resulting
1 3
computed hydrograph was plotted i n Fig. 55 together with the corresponding
experimental hydrograph for comparison. The sufficiently close agreement
o f the two hydrographs indicates that the linear approximation by the simple
systems model is an acceptable approximation for the case being studied,
although the nonl inearity of the relationship between the storage and the
rainfall and runoff is generally true*
However, a lumped system model, whether it is linear or not,
may suffer from the fact that the time and space transformation of the
i n p u t i n t o t h e output i s n o t e x p l i c i t l y considered, Actually, the outflow
f r o m t h e w a t e r s h e d i s d e r i v e d from t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f r a i n f a l l i n t o t h e
w a t e r s h e d a t some p r i o r t i m e b u t n o t f r o m t h e i n p u t a t t h e moment t h e
o u t p u t i s considered. The t i m e l a g between i n p u t and o u t p u t depends on,
among o t h e r f a c t o r s , t h e d i s t a n c e from t h e p o i n t o f i n p u t t o t h e o u t l e t
o f t h e watershed. T h i s t i m e - l a g e f f e c t i s e i t h e r i g n o r e d o r assumed t o
20, 3 1
be a c o n s t a n t i n t h e lumped system approach. Certain investigators
u s i n g lumped system models a t t e m p t e d t o compensate t h e t i m e - l a g e f f e c t by
i n t o r d u c i n g a t r a n s l a t i o n t i m e i n t o t h e t i m e v a r i a b l e when such e f f e c t s
become s u b s t a n t i a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t .
T a b l e 2, Comparison o f t h e R e s u i t s o f Systems Approach w i t h t h e

Experimental Results. re or square watershed, W.,/i = 1230,
Computed 0.75 0.74 0 -4.9 0.66
Experiment 0.73 .
0 78 0.53 0.50
As shown i n T a b l e 2, t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l a n d computed v a l u e s o f $ / i A ,
t /T, and t 2 / T a g r e e r e a s o n a b l y w e l l b u t t h e v a l u e s o f t /T d i f f e r c o n s i d -
P r
erably. By no means s h o u l d t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i n t r / T be i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean
t h a t the p r e d i c t i o n f o r t h e recession i s l e s s accurate. Rather, the d i f -
f e r e n c e i s m a i n l y due t o t h e p r o p a g a t i o n o f e r r o r s by u s i n g an average
value o f K I n f a c t , t h e almost linear r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s t e r a g e
3"
and t h e r u n o f f a f t e r t h e r a i n has stopped i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l
and t h e computed r e c e s s i o n c u r v e s w o u l d a g r e e v e r y w e l l i f a common r e f -
e r e n c e o f Q / i A a t a t i m e a f t e r t h e r a i n has stopped i s used.
I f t h e storage i s t r u l y a l i n e a r f u n c t i o n o f r u n o f f a f t e r the
cease o f t h e r a i n f a l l , t h e r e c e s s i o n i s t h e n an e x p o n e n t i a l f u n c t i o n o f
time. From Eq. (4.3) and t h e c o n t i n u i t y e q u a t i o n , Eq. (4.1), w i t h I = 0,
one has
and
S o l v i n g t h e s e two e q u a t i o n s y i e l d s
i n w h i c h c i s a c o n s t a n t and t V s a t i m e measured from a r e f e r e n c e t i m e

a f t e r t h e r a i n has stopped. Each o f Eqs. (4.17), (4.22), (4.25), and
(4.28) i s o f t h e f o r m o f Eq. (7.8). Moreover, by t a k i n g e q u a l t i m e
intervals of A t , Eq. (7.8) gives the discharge a t the j - t h i n t e r v a l as
- j~t / K 1 -At/K1
= e
'j ce Qj-1
That i s , t h e r e c e s s i o n i s o f such a n a t u r e t h a t Q./Q i s constant.

J j-1
The above-mentioned n a t u r e o f t h e r e c e s s i o n c u r v e s t r o n g l y
suggests t h a t d u r i n g t h e recession p e r i o d t h e value o f K i s constant
1
f o r a g i v e n watershed, d i s r e g a r d i n g t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e r a i n s t o r m
causing t h e recession r u n o f f . The v a l u e s o f K ' s s h o u l d be computed sep-
a r a t e l y f o r the r a i n i n g p e r i o d from t h e recession p e r i o d f o r b e t t e r accuracy.
E x p e r i m e n t a l r e s u l t s f o r a g i v e n w a t e r s h e d c o n d i t Y o n o f s q u a r e shape and
s = 0.005 h a v i n g d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s o f w x / i v e r i f y t h a t K1 i s indeed a p p r o x i -
x
m a t e l y a c o n s t a n t , v a r y i n g from 6 1 sec t o 6 4 sec, d u r i n g t h e r e c e s s i o n a f t e r
a s h o r t t i m e s i n c e t h e cease o f t h e r a i n . The v a l u e s o f K2 a l s o v a r y o n l y
s l i g h t l y around z e r o f o r t h e r e c e s s i o n p e r i o d .
A s e p a r a t e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e value; o f K1, K2, a n d K f ~ trh e
"3
r a i n i n g p e r i o d i s n o t i n t e n d e d i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y as i t r e q u i r e s a l a r g e r
amount o f data t o e s t a b l i s h t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e K ' s w i t h t h e r a i n s t o r m
characteristics. I n s t e a d , as d e s c r i b e d i n S e c t i o n 6-2, w i t h t h e values o f
K1 and K2 computed f o r t h e r e c e s s i o n p e r i o d , Eq. (4.3) gives the value o f
K w h i c h i s found t o v a r y w i t h i n c o n s i d e r a b l e range f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l
3
results. I t i s believed t h a t the c o e f f i c i e n t K may r e f l e c t s t r o n g l y t h e
3
physical characteristics o f the input, i n p a r t i c u l a r t h e movement o f t h e
rainstorm.
The s u g g e s t i o n o f e v a l u a t i n g t h e v a l u e s o f t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s
i n Eq. (4.3) f o r t h e r a i n i n g and r e c e s s i o n p e r i o d s s e p a r a t e l y has i t s
physical j u s t i f i c a t i o n . During the recession period, t h e unique behavior
o f f l o w and t h e i n s e n s i t i v i t y o f t t o e i t h e r the rainstorm v e l o c i t y o r
r
t h e r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y have been d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 7-2. I n t h i s period,
t h e v a l u e s o f t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s do n o t v a r y much. During t h e r a i n i n g
period, on t h e o t h e r hand, t h e v a l u e o f Kl f o r the shallow-water f l o w
w o u l d be d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t f o r t h e deep-water f l o w . I t i s obvious t h a t
t h e r a i n d r o p e f f e c t on s h a l l o w - w a t e r f l o w i s more p r o m i n e n t t h a n on deep-
water flow. The dependence o f t h e f l o w c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on r a i n d r o p e f f e c t s
has been d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 3 and S e c t i o n 7-1.
Finally, t h e r a t i o n a l f o r m u l a i s t h e s i m p l e s t lumped-system model
b u t i t does n o t o f t e n produce s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s u l t s i n p r e d i c t i n g t h e magni-
t u d e o f t h e peak d i s c h a r g e f r o m a w a t e r s h e d under moving r a i n s t o r m s , n o r
does i t g i v e t h e t i m e o f o c c u r r e n c e o f t h e peak. Also, the representative
reference v e l o c i t y U i s d i f f i c u l t t o evaluate, i f n o t impossible. The
f o r m u l a i s i n r e a l i t y an o v e r s i m p l i f i e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a much c o m p l i c a t e d
phenomenon.
CHAPTER 8. CONCLUSIONS
The movement of a rainstorm determines the spatial and temporal

distributions of the rainfall over a watershed and hence it affects the
characteristics of the flow on the watershed, Through analytical and
experimental investigations presented in the preceding chapters, the
importance of the movement of rainstorms on the time distribution of
the surface runoff has been demonstrated. Throughout this study, the
watershed surface is assumed to be impervious and no abstractions are
cons i dered,
From theoretical considerations based on hydrodynamic prEnci-
ples, it is clear that although a satisfactory one-dimensional numerical
solution of the problem i s possible, much effort is needed to improve
the theoretical method for greater precision. At least four major dif-
ficulties must be overcome in this aspect. First, a numerical method,
which is within the capability of available computers, must be provided
to solve the set of differential equations describing a two-dimensional
unsteady spat ially-varied free-surface flow. Secondly, boundary and
initial conditions of the flow problem must be correctly and properly
defined. Thirdly, a technique must be provided to express the coefficient
of resistance to flow accounting for the unsteadiness and nonunifoemity
flow must be considered in a satisfactory manner.
Experiments were performed in the WES to provide quantitative

information on surface runoff from moving rainstorms. The geometric shape
of the watersheds tested is either square or approximately triangular,
each having a channel-flow and overland-flow portions. Two uniform inten-
sities of rainfall and twelve constant rainstorm velocities for the square
watershed case and four rainstorm velocities for the triangular watershed
case were tested, The duration T of the rainfall at any point on the
watershed is equal to L / / W / for the square watershed and 0.8 L / ( W ( for
the triangular watershed, where W is the velocity of the rainstorm move-
ment and L is a characteristic length of the watershed.
Experimental results show that the surface-runoff hydrographs
vary with different rainstorm velocities and differ from those of the
e q u i v a l e n t s t a t i o n a r y r a i n s t o r m s h a v i n g t h e same r a i n f a l l i n t e n s i t y and
d u r a t i o n a t any p o i n t on t h e watershed, i,,e,, h a v i n g t h e same t o t a l volume
of r a i n f a l l , W i t h few e x c e p t i o n s , t h e e q u i v a l e n t s t a t i o n a r y r a i n s t o r m s
u s u a l l y produced t h e most c r i t i c a l r u n o f f s f r o m t h e e n g i n e e r i n g v i e w p o i n t .
For a g i v e n s u r f a c e a r e a A under t h e r a i n s t o r m s t e s t e d , t h e r e l a t i v e peak
discharge \ / i A was f o u n d t o decrease w i t h i n c r e a s i n g w t h i s decreas-
i n g t r e n d was more pronounced f o r f l a t t e r l o n g i t u d i n a l b a s i n s l o p e s
x
.
The r e l a t i v e t i m e o f o c c u r r e n c e o f t h e peak d i s c h a r g e , t W/L, was f o u n d
P
t o b e a c o n s t a n t f o r each o f t h e t h r e e d i r e c t i o n s o f t h e movement o f t h e
rainstorms tested, The t i m e l a g between t h e maximum r a t e s o f r a i n f a l l
and r u n o f f , expressed i n n o n d i m e n s i o n a l forms, t i/L,was found t o be
2
a p p r o x i m a t e l y a c o n s t a n t f o r a g i v e n w a t e r s h e d and independent o f t h e v e l o c -
i t y o f t h e r a i n s t o r m movement. Moreover, the r e l a t i v e time i n t e r v a l t r i / L ,
where t i s t h e t i m e between t h e peak d i s c h a r g e and t h e d i s c h a r g e o f one
r
h a l f o f t h e peak, was f o u n d a s a u n i q u e f u n c t i o n d e c r e a s i n g w i t h i n c r e a s i n g
\wl/i. Nevertheless, i t has been demonstrated t h a t t h e p h y s i c a l n a t u r e o f
t h e r e c e s s i o n p o r t i o n o f t h e hydrographs v a r i e s w i t h d i f f e r e n t watersheds
b u t as an a p p r o x i m a t i o n i t i s n o t d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
o f t h e rainstorm.
A s i m p l e l i n e a r lumped systems approach was i n t r o d u c e d t o p r e d i c t
t h e r u n o f f due t o moving r a i n s t o r m s . The method u t i l i z e s t h e c o n t i n u i t y
r e l a t i o n s h i p and r e q u i r e s c e r t a i n d a t a t o b e a v a i l a b l e f o r a g i v e n w a t e r -
shed t o e v a l u a t e t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s r e l a t i n g t h e s t o r a g e t o r a i n f a l l and
runoff. T h i s method has b u i l t - i n drawbacks i n t h a t i t i s an over-
s i m p l i f i c a t i o n and does n o t a c c o u n t f o r t h e t i m e l a g e f f e c t o f t h e t r a n s -
formation o f r a i n f a l l t o discharge. Thus t h e method can o n l y be used as
a f i r s t approximation.
FIG. 7 . EXPERIMENTAL HYDROGRAPHS FOR A SQUARE
WATERSHED, W,/ i =-4900, i L / v = 240
FIG. 8. EXPERIMENTAL HYDROGRAPHS FOR A SQUARE
WATERSHED, W, / i = -2550 , iL / v = 450
-
t
T
WATERSHED, W,/ i =4900, i L / v ~ 2 4 0
FIG. 16, EXPERIMENTAL HYDROGRAPHS FOR

A SQUARE WATERSHED, W,/ i =2600,
i L / v =458
FIG, 23, EXPERIMENTAL HYDROGRAPHS FOR A SQUARE
WATERSHED, W,/ i = 4 9 5 0 , iL / v = 230
WATERSHED, W,/ i = 2 6 0 0 , i L / v = 440
5gg
Z<N
E 3, I I
wa.
a
x
m \
w a d
cvl
pa)
iL
-
pa)
aoa
0 lo"
A = area
B = breadth of channel, as defined i n Fige 1; also, water surface width
b = width of overland flow, as defined i n Fig. 1
C = Chkzylscoefficient; also, a constant
c= concentration of raindrops; also, a coefficient
D = hydraulic depth
d = equivalent diameter of raindrop
IF = Froude number
F, = body force
f = force due to pressure

P
F r = resistance
= shear force
FT
f = Darcy-Weisbac.hns
resistance coefficient
g = gravitational acceleration
h = depth of flow
I = input rate or inflow rate
i = rainfall intensity
K = coefficients, j = 1 to 6
j
k = surface roughness .
L = length of watershed
M = momentum
m = mass; also, an exponent
n = Manning'; ;=ughness coefficient

p = pressure
Q = discharge or output rate
($ = peak discharge
= discharge along x-direction per unit width on y-direction
x
= discharge along y-direction per unit width on x-direction
4~
]R = Reynolds number
S .= storage
s = slope
s f = energy gradient, measured as slope
= slope of land or channel
so
s = watershed longitudinal slope

X
s = watershed lateral slope
Y
T = duration of rainfall
t = time, measured from the moment when discharge starts
t = time of occurrence of peak discharge
P
tr = length of time required for discharge to reduce from C$ to C$/2
to = length of time for a rainstorm to cover the entire watershed
t1 = time lag between the time when rain starts falling on the watershed
and the time when discharge first appears at the outlet of watershed
t2 = time interval between the maximum rates of rainfall and runoff

U = velocity component of flow in watershed along x-direction
u = velocity component of the lateral inflow along x-direction
V = velocity component of flow in watershed along y-direction
v = velocity component of the lateral inflow along y-direction
W = Weber number
1J = velocity of the movement of rainstorm
Wx = velocity component of the movement of rainstorm along x-direction
W = velocity component of the movement of rainstorm along y-direction
Y
w = width of a watershed
x = longitudinal coordinate
y = transverse or lateral coordinate
z = vertical coordinate
z = distance of the centroid of a flow cross-sectional area below the
water surface
v = kinematic viscosity
p = mass density
a = surface tension
T = shear stress
REFERENCES
1, Keulegan, G . H a , " S p a t i a l l y V a r i a b l e Discharge Over a S l o p i n g plane,^^
Trans. AGU, Vol. 25, p p . 956959, 1944.
2. Iwagaki, Y e , lVundamenta% Studies on t h e Runoff A n a l y s i s by Character-
i s t i c ~ ,B~u l l .
No. 10, D i s a s t e r P r e v e n t i o n Research I n s t i t u t e , Kyoto
Univ,, Kyoto, Japan, Dec. 1955.
'3. Behlke, C, E a 3 lT"hh Mechanics o f Overland Flow," B $ h e D a Thesis, Stanford
UnSv., Stanford, C a l i f .,
1957,
4. L i g g e t t , J. A., "Unsteady Open Channel Flow w i t h L a t e r a l I n f l ~ w ,Tech. ~

No, 2, Dept. o f C i v i l Eng,, S t a n f o r d Univ., Stanford, C a l i f . ,
J u l y 1959.
5. Chen, C, L,, "An A n a l y s i s o f Overland Flow," Ph.B. Thes?s, Mich, S t a t e
Univ., East Lansing, Mich., 1962.
6. MOO, D o C., and B r a t e r , E . F, " S p a t i a l l y Varied Flow from C o n t r o l l e d
Rainfall," , ASCE, Vol. 88, No. WY6, pp, 31-56, 1962.
7, h r g a l i , J a R,, [ ' H y d r a u l i c Behavior sf Small Drainage B a s i n s , ' T e c h .
No, 30, Dept. o f C i v i l Eng,, S t a n f o r d Univ., Stanford, C a l i f . ,
Oct. 1'963,
8. Henderson, F o M e , and b o d i n g , R. 'A., u'Over%andFlow and Groundwater
Flow from a Steady R a i n f d l o f F i n i t e Duration," 3
AGU, V o l e 69, NO. 8, pp. 1531-1540, 1964.
9. Chen, C. L,, and Hansen, V. E,, ""Thery and C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Overland

.
Flow," Trans. ASAE, Vol 9, No. 1, pp, 20-26, 1966.
10, L i g g e t t , J. A,, and Bdoolhiser, 8. A., ""Difference S o l u t i o n s o f t h e

Shallow- Water Equat ion,'" ASCE, Vo1, 93, No. EMZ,
pp. 39-71, 1967.
11. Woolhiser, B. A,., and L i g g e t t , J a A,, "Unsteady, One-Dimensional Flow

over a Plane -
The R i s i n g Hydrograph," Water Resources Res., AGU,
Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 753-771, 1967.
12. Ragan, R. M a , !'The Determination o f Local I n f l o w s E n t e r i n g a Channel,I'

, Vol. 1, p p . 235-243, June 1967.
13. Mamisao, J. P, ilDevelopment o f an A g r i c u l t u r a l Watershed by S i m i 1 itude,"

M.S. Thesis, Iowa S t a t e . C o I l e g e , Ames, Iowa, 1952.
14. Harbaugh, T. E., "Time D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Runoff From Watersheds," PhoDa

Thesis, Univ. o f Ill., Urbana, Ill., 1966.
15. Harbaugh, T o E., and Chow, V, T., "A Study o f t h e Roughness o f Conceptual
R i v e r Systems o r Watersheds," 2 Vol. 1,
pp. 9-17, June 1967.
16. Grace, R. A., and Eagleson, P . S., "The M o d e l l i n g o f O v e r l a n d Flow,"
Water Resources Res., AGU, V o l . 2, pp. 3 9 3 - 4 0 6 , 1966.
17. Grace, R e A,, and Eagleson, P, S., "Scale ode% o f Urban R u n o f f f r o m

Storm Ra i n f a l l , ' ! , ASCE, V o l . 93, No* HY3, pp. 161-176,
1967.
18. Chery, D . L., J r . "Design and T e s t s o f a p h y s i c a l Watershed M ~ d e l , ~ ~

, Vol. 4, NO. 3, pp. 224-235, 1 9 6 6 .
19. Chow, V. T., " H y d r o l o g i c D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f Waterway Areas f o r t h e
Design o f D r a i n a g e S t r u c t u r e s i n Small D r a i n a g e Bas i n s , I 1
Sta. B u l l . No. 642, U n i v . o f Ill.,Urbana, Ill., March 1962.
20, Chow, V. T., Ed., , McGraw-Hill, 1964,

Secs, 14, 20, 21, 22, and 25-1,
21. Maksimov, V. A., "Computing R u n o f f Produced by a Heavy R a i n s t o r m w i t h

,If ran slated f r o m ~ u s s i a n ,)
, AGU, No, 5, pp. 510-513, 1 9
22. Narcus, N., IiA i a b o r a t o r y and A n a l y t i c a l Study s f Surface R u n o f f under
Moving Rainstorms,I1 Ph.D. T h e s i s , U n i v . o f H I 1 .,
Urbana, Ill., 1968.
23. Chow, V. f . , , McGraw-Hill, New York, 1959,

p . 625,
24. Rouse, H., I i C r i t i c a l A n a l y s i s o f Open-Channel Res i stance,Ii

dDiv , ASCE, Vol.
91, No. HY4, pp. 1-25, 1965.
25, Yu, Y . S., and McNown, J . S., "Runoff from I m p e r v i o u s Surfaces," J . Hyd,
Res., I n t e r n a t . Assoc. Hyd. Res., V o l . 2, No. 1, Pp. 3-24, 1964.
26. Chen, C. L., and Chow, V. T., "Hydrodynamics o f ath he ma tic ally Sirnu-
l a t e d S u r f a c e Runoff , ' I 3
.
No. 18, U n i v . o f Ill.,Urbana, Ill.,1968.
27. C r a n d a l l , S. H e , and Dahl, N. C,, Eds., An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e Mechanics

o f S o l i d s , M c G r a w - H i l l , New York, 1959, pp. 98-99.
28. G u i l l e m i n , E. A . , , John W i l e y G Sons,

New York, 1953, p . 196.
29. Chow, V. T., and Harbaugh, T . E . , "Raindrop ~ r o d u c t i o nf o r L a b o r a t o r y

Watershed E x p e r i m e n t a t i o n , "
pp. 61 11-61 19, 1965.
30. Chow, V. T,, " L a b o r a t o r y Study o f Watershed H y d r o l o g y , " Proc, I n t e r n a t .

V o l . 1, pp. 194-202, June 1967.
31; Kulandaiswarny, V i C , , "A B a s i c Study o f t h e R a i n f a l l Excess-Surface

Runoff R e l a t i o n s h i p i n a B a s i n System,I1 Ph.D. T h e s i s , U n i v . o f Ill.,
Urbana, Ill.,1964.

Moving Rainstorms Impact Surface Runoff

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Moving Rainstorms Impact Surface Runoff

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

'7

A STUDY OF SURFACE RUNOFF

DUE TO MOV NG RA NSTOBMS

A Contribution to the nternationa

BEN CHlE YEN and VEN TE CHOW

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGlNEERlNG

A STUDY OF SURFACE RUNOFF

DUE TO MOVING WAlNSTORMS

For a given total amount of rain falling on a watershed,

the temporal and spatial distributions of the rainfall, and conse-

storm. .In this study, the influence of the movement of rainstorms

on surface runoff from watersheds is investigated through the use

of a laboratory "Watershed Experimentation SystemH and by theoret-

For the laboratory investigation, impervious watersheds

continuity and momentum are derived for spatially-varied unsteady

free-surface flows, Difficulties in obtaining a sat isfactory solu-

are discussed. The hydrodynamic behavior of spat ially-varied unsteady

free-surface flows so described is used to interpret and confirm the

experimental results obtained in the laboratory investigation. Also,

a simple linear lumped-system model to simulate the surface runoff

behavior of the watershed is described and the possibility of its use

to synthesize surface runoff hydrographs from moving rainstorms is

H y d r o l o g i c Systems Approaches ............... 17

4-1. D e s c r i p t i o n o f the Watershed as a System . . . . . . . 17

4-2. Runoff from Rectangular Watersheds

under U n i f o r m l y Moving Rainstorms . . . . . . . . . 19

4 3 . Runoff from Rainstorms Waving Durations

Equal t o Length o f Time f o r Rainstorms

48.4. Magnitude and Time o f Occurrence

4-5 . The R a t i o n a l Formula Approximation . . . . . . . . . . 30

Experimental Equipment and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 35

5.1 . Experimental Equipment . . . * . . . . . . . .. . . . 35

5.2 . Experimental Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

6.1 . Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 44

7-1 . Surface Runoff from a kdatershed

under Moving Rainstorms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

7.2 . Experimental Hydrographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

7.3 . Peak Discharge and I t s Time

7.4 . Lag o f Time Between R a i n f a l l and Runoff . . . . . . . 64

7.5 . Compar i son o f Hydrog raphs Produced

by Moving Rainstorms w i t h Those by

1. Summary of the experimental results . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

approach with the experimental results . . . . , . .

Hyetographs f o r a moving r a i n s t o r m ............. 21

Geometry o f t h e watersheds t e s t e d .............. 38

Schematic drawing o f t h e t i m e s i n v o l v e d i n hydrographs . . . 46

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a ' square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

Exper i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

W X / i = 1200, i L / v = 240 .................. ~n

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,

E x p e r i m e n t a l hydrographs f o r a square watershed,