Rainfall
1. Introduction
Rainstorms vary greatly in space and time, and can be represented using isohyetal maps, which show
contours of constant rainfall depth. This report examines the Johnstown storm (1889) and Austin storm
(1981) to highlight how rainfall data helps assess storm severity.
2. Isohyetal Maps and Storm Comparison
Isohyetal maps illustrate rainfall depth for specific storms. The Johnstown storm caused significant
fatalities and damage due to a dam failure, while the Austin storm was smaller but more intense. Both
storms had a maximum rainfall depth of around 10 inches, but the Austin storm was more localized and
brief.
3. Rainfall Data and Hyetographs
Rainfall is recorded by rain gauges, with data plotted as hyetographs (rainfall over time) and cumulative
rainfall mass curves (total rainfall accumulation). These graphs help visualize storm progression and total
rainfall.
4. Calculating Maximum Rainfall Intensity
Maximum rainfall intensity is calculated by summing rainfall totals over specific time intervals (e.g., 30
minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours). For example, the 30-minute intensity in the Austin storm was 6.14 in/h. The
intensity decreases as the time period increases.
5. Storm Severity and Design Implications
Calculating maximum rainfall depths and intensities helps assess storm severity and informs the design
of flow control structures such as drainage systems. This data is vital for flood risk management and
infrastructure planning.
6. Conclusion
Rainstorms exhibit significant spatial and temporal variability. Isohyetal maps and rainfall data analysis
are essential for understanding storm severity and designing infrastructure to manage stormwater and
reduce risk.
Areal rainfall
Report on Methods for Calculating Areal Average Precipitation
1. Introduction
Determining areal average precipitation is crucial for hydrological studies and water resource
management. Several methods are used to calculate this value, with each offering different levels of
accuracy and flexibility. This report discusses the arithmetic-mean method, Thiessen method, isohyetal
method, and other techniques for calculating areal average rainfall.
2. Arithmetic-Mean Method
The arithmetic-mean method is the simplest approach. It calculates the average rainfall over a
watershed by averaging the rainfall depths recorded at multiple gages. The formula for this method is:
P=∑j=1lPjAjAP = \frac{\sum_{j=1}^{l} P_j A_j}{A}
Where:
PjP_j is the rainfall recorded at gage jj,
AjA_j is the area assigned to gage jj,
AA is the total area of the watershed.
This method is straightforward but may lack accuracy in regions with uneven rainfall distribution.
3. Thiessen Method
The Thiessen method is more accurate than the arithmetic mean method, especially in areas with varied
rainfall. It involves creating Thiessen polygons by drawing perpendicular bisectors between adjacent
gages. However, this method has limitations:
It requires a new Thiessen network every time the gage network changes.
It does not account for orographic influences (elevation effects on rainfall).
4. Isohyetal Method
The isohyetal method improves on the Thiessen method by constructing isohyets (contours of equal
rainfall) using observed depths at rain gages and interpolating between adjacent gages. This method is
flexible, allowing for storm patterns to influence isohyet placement, and works well with dense gage
networks. Once the isohyetal map is created, the area between each pair of isohyets is calculated and
multiplied by the average rainfall between those isohyets to compute the areal average precipitation.
Advantage: It is more accurate for complex storms and varying rainfall distributions.
Limitation: Requires a dense network of gages to construct accurate isohyetal maps.
5. Other Methods
Additional methods, like the reciprocal-distance-squared method, involve weighting rainfall data from
distant gages based on their distance to a central point. The influence of a gage’s rainfall decreases as the
distance increases, improving accuracy in areas with sparse data.
6. Method Comparisons
According to research by Singh and Chowdhury (1986), all methods provide comparable results,
particularly when applied over long time periods. The variation between methods is more noticeable
when working with daily rainfall data rather than annual data.
7. Conclusion
Each method for calculating areal average precipitation has its strengths and weaknesses. The
arithmetic-mean method is simple but less accurate, while the Thiessen and isohyetal methods provide
more precision, especially with a dense gage network. Other methods, like the reciprocal-distance-
squared method, offer alternative approaches to improve rainfall estimation in areas with sparse gage
data. The choice of method depends on data availability, storm complexity, and the specific needs of the
hydrological study.
