USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20245051

Improving time of concentration estimates for small rural watersheds in the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province, West Virginia

Terence Messinger·Darrin A. Holmes·James D. Scott·Douglas W. Kirk
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, compared time of concentration (T c ) and related runoff characteristics measured at four field sites in West Virginia to estimates of these values made using accepted methods. These four sites were selected to represent a range of basin size, length, and slope, and a range of estimated T c . Instrumentation included a rain gage and a streamgage at all sites. Two streamgages, USGS station number (no.) 03159718 Grasslick Creek tributary above Interstate 77 near Fairplain, West Virginia, (referred to as Fairplain in this report) and USGS station no. 03159823 Grass Run tributary above Interstate 77 near Ripley, W. Va., (referred to as Ripley in this report) were near each other in northwestern West Virginia at the outlets of small basins with moderate slope. The largest, longest, and flattest basin in the study was upstream from USGS station no. 03190307 Hedricks Creek Tributary above US–19 near Hico, W. Va. (Hico). The final gaged basin in the study, that of USGS station no. 03197062 Cookman Fork at Interstate 79 near Wallback, W. Va., (Wallback) in central West Virginia, had a drainage area nearly as large as Hico, but the basin was more compact. Precipitation and streamflow data were collected at the streamgages between October 2017 and July 2020. Storms were identified and classified through an iterative process relying on inspecting graphs created from the precipitation and streamflow data. Three hydrograph time metrics that represent T c were computed for this study: time to rise, time to recede from a high point on the hydrograph to an inflection on the recession, and the time between an inflection on the hyetograph and an inflection on the recession of the hydrograph (precipitation inflection to recession inflection or PI-to-RI). Hico had the slowest time metrics: the streamgage had an average T c of 34 and 32 minutes for time to rise and time to recede, respectively. The time between the PI-to-RI at Hico, 38 minutes, was the longest for any of the characteristics at any of the streamgages. Wallback had the second slowest time metrics. At Wallback, average T c for time to rise and time to recede was similar, 23 and 25 minutes, respectively. The average time between the PI-to-RI for Wallback was greater than its time to rise or time to recede, 32 minutes. At Fairplain and Ripley, time to rise was 18 and 19 minutes, time to recede was 14 and 16 minutes, and time between the PI-to-RI was 22 and 27 minutes, respectively. At Ripley, PI-to-RI and time to rise were significantly different from each other. Differences in metrics were not statistically significant (p ≤0.05) among streamgages. At all streamgages, predictions made with the “Rational Method” were within one average standard deviation of the overall mean T c . The Rational Method was applied following two different procedures— (1) channel geometry was estimated using professional judgment and (2) channel geometry estimates were adjusted using regional equations. The three different time metrics had an inconsistent relation with the estimates. Some of the predictions differed from individual hydrograph time metrics by more than one standard deviation. Predicted values for the 10-year storm were within the interquartile range (IQR) for 4 of 12 combinations of streamgages and time metrics. Adjusted T c predictions were within the IQR of PI-to-RI for Fairplain and Wallback, longer than the IQR of observed PI-to-RI at Hico, and shorter than the IQR of observed PI-to-RI at Ripley. The adjusted predictions of T c were within the IQR of time-to-rise for Hico and Fairplain and were longer than the IQR for Ripley and Wallback. At Ripley, the predictions were not within the IQR for either PI-to-RI or time to rise, but instead, were between them. These lines of evidence do not indicate large, systematic errors in T c estimates.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations ReportReport
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.201483° to 40.638801° latitude; -82.644739° to -77.719029° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Terence Messinger, Darrin A. Holmes, James D. Scott, Douglas W. Kirk. 2024-12-19. Improving time of concentration estimates for small rural watersheds in the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province, West Virginia. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245051

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗
USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗
USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗