US Army Corps

of Engineers
Hydrologic Engineering Center

Estimating Sediment Delivery

and Yield on Alluvial Fans

June 1990

Approved for Public Release. Distribution Unlimited.

TP-130

Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this
burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the Department of Defense, Executive
Services and Communications Directorate (0704-0188). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be
subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION.
1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

2. REPORT TYPE

June 1990

Technical Paper

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

Estimating Sediment Delivery and Yield on Alluvial Fans

5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S)

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

Dr. Robert C. MacArthur, Michael D. Harvey, Edward Sing

5e. TASK NUMBER

5F. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER

US Army Corps of Engineers

Institute for Water Resources
Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC)
609 Second Street
Davis, CA 95616-4687

TP-130

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

10. SPONSOR/ MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/ MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Paper prepared for the International Symposium on the Hydraulics/Hydrology of Arid Lands, ASCE Hydraulics Division,
San Diego, CA, 30 July 3 August 1990.
14. ABSTRACT

This paper summarizes the procedures used for computing the basin wide annual yields and single event sediment
production for ephemeral channels located on an incised alluvial fan in Central California. Unique geomorphic
characteristics of the basin and alluvial fan are discussed in light of data and analytical methods necessary to compute
sediment delivery and yield at a proposed dam site.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

alluvial fans, sediment production, sediment yield, transport capacity, geomorophology, single event floods, episodic flows,
average annual sediment yield, flow duration methods, regional methods
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:
a. REPORT
b. ABSTRACT

c. THIS PAGE

17. LIMITATION
OF
ABSTRACT

UU

18. NUMBER
OF
PAGES

14

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18

Estimating Sediment Delivery

and Yield on Alluvial Fans

June 1990

US Army Corps of Engineers

Institute for Water Resources
Hydrologic Engineering Center
609 Second Street
Davis, CA 95616
(530) 756-1104
(530) 756-8250 FAX
www.hec.usace.army.mil

TP-130

Papers in this series have resulted from technical activities of the Hydrologic
Engineering Center. Versions of some of these have been published in
technical journals or in conference proceedings. The purpose of this series is to
make the information available for use in the Center's training program and for
distribution with the Corps of Engineers.

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of

the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents.

The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or
promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official
endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products.

ESTIMATING SEDIMENT DELIVERY AND YIELD ON ALLUVIAL FANS

Robert C. MacArthur', M.ASCE, Michael D. Harvey", and
Edward F. Sing, M M C E

Abstract
This paper summarizes the procedures used for computing the basinwide annual yields
and single event sediment production for ephemoral channels located on an incised alluvial
fan in Central California. Unique geomorphic characteristics of the basin and alluvial fan
are discussed in light of data and analytical methods necessary to compute sediment
delivery and yield a t a proposed damsite.
Introduction
A Sediment Engineering Investigation (SEI) of the Caliente Creek watershed (470 sq.
mi.) in Kern County, California was conducted to determine the watershed sediment yield
upstream from a proposed flood detention reservoir located on the Caliente Fan. Previous
studies estimated annual sediment yields at the proposed reservoir site based on traditional
soil loss methods and sediment accumulation rates observed in impoundments along the
Sierra Nevada, Tehachapi and Transverse Mountain Ranges. Initial project feasibiity was
considered based on preliminary cost/benefit analyses using the rough sediment yield
estimates. Further review of the potential annual maintenance requirements led to the
conclusion that the economic viability of the project depended heavily on annual 0 & M
costs potentially required to remove the yearly accumulation of sediment within the
proposed reservoir. Accurate estimates for the average annual sediment yield and single
event sediment delivery were essential.
Further studies were undertaken to (1) identify specific geomorphic characteristics of
the stream channels and watersheds upstream from the proposed flood control reservoir
that could effect the sediment yield at the damsite, and (2) to relate channel and basin
processes to sediment production and yields for various frequency precipitation and flood
flow events in the watershed. This paper summarizes the procedures used for computing
the basinwide annual yields and single event sediment production, along with conclusions
and recommendations for other project design modifications.
Hydraulic Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center,
609 Second Street, Davis, CA 95616 U.S.A.
Principal Geomorphologist,Water Engineering & Technology, Inc., 419 Canyon, Suite
225, Fort Collins, CO 80521, U.S.A.
Hydraulic Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, 650 Capitol
Mall, Sacramento, CA 95814, U.S.A.
Paper prepared for the International Symposium on the Hydraulics/Hydrology
of Arid Lands, ASCE Hydraulics Division, July 30-August 3, 1990, San Diego, CA

Approach
A two element SEI was conducted to address the sediment yield question: (1)
geomorphic analyses (Harvey et al., 1990) were conducted to determine those unique
characteristics of the basin and channels important to estimating sediment yield, and (2)
sedimentation analyses (HEC, 1990) were conducted to determine the sediment yield in
light of the findings from the geomorphic analyses.
To determine the amount of sediment that can possibly enter the proposed reservoir
during its design life (100 years), both the average annual sediment yield and single event
sediment yields are estimated using a variety of sediment engineering procedures as
reported in EM 1110-2-4000, "Sediment Investigations of Rivers and Reservoirs," (COE,
1989) and recommended by others. Available scientific and engineering literature was
reviewed, a three-day field reconnaissance and sediment data collection investigation was
conducted, persons familiar with the Caliente Creek Project and watershed were
intewiewed, and a series of sediment engineering analyses to determine the possible
sedimentation characteristics of the drainage basin at the damsite were carried out.
Morphometric data for the alluvial fan in the vicinity of the proposed reservoir site were
obtained from 2-foot contour mapping. Sixteen bed and bank material samples and two
Wolman Counts were collected at representative locations throughout the drainage basin.
Average Annual Sediment Yield - The possible range of average annual sediment
yield at the proposed reservoir site is estimated from the results from eight different
sources of data and/or methods for estimating sediment yield. The following sources of
data and procedures were used: (1) Previous reports and publications were thoroughly
reviewed, (2) U.S.D.A. (1977) reservoir sedimentation rates were examined, (3) recent COE
reservoir sedimentation survey data were analyzed, (4) sediment yield maps for the
Western United States (U.S.D.A., SCS, 1975) were examined, (5) the average annual
sediment yield was estimated from computations of the total event sediment volumes for
single events ranging from the 2-year event up to the PMF based on channel transport
capacity rather than watershed sediment production and delivery, (6) a similar flow
duration and sediment load curve integration method (see EM 1110-2-4000, COE, 1989)
was used to estimate the average annual sediment production and yield to the reservoir
site, (7) the Pacific Southwest Inter-Agency Committee (PSIAC) method was used to
estimate basin-wide sediment yield from the entire watershed, and (8) the Dendy and
Bolton (1976) Regional Analysis Method for sediment yield was applied. Results from
these analyses are discussed next. Detailed procedures for conducting such investigations
are presented in the references cited and in Engineering Manual 1110-2-4000 (COE, 1989).
Table 1 presents the estimated sediment yields computed using the various
computational procedures listed above and from measured reservoir surveys conducted by
the Corps of Engineers and SCS. Based on measured sediment accumulation rates
recorded in the six Tulare, Kings, and Kern County reservoirs, the approximate range of
observed sediment yields is from 0.2 AF/sq mi/yr to 2.2 AF/sq mi/yr with an average of
approximately 1.0 AF/sq mi/yr. Sediment yield rates determined for the Western United
States are reported by the U.S.DA, SCS (1975). From the mapping of yield rates, it
appears that the upper Caliente watershed area has sediment yield rates from 0.2 to 0.5
AF/sq mi/yr, with pockets as high as 0.5 to 1.0 AJ?/sq mi/yr. In the lower portions of
the basin, on the valley floor and on portions of the broad alluvial fan, the estimated
yields are reported to be in the 0.1 to 0.2 AF/sq mi/yr range. Using area weighting
methods to sum the yields from contributing subbasins, the approximate annual yield
appears to range from 0.2 to about 0.75 AF/sq mi/yr, with an average of about 0.47
AF/sq mi/yr for the entire watershed.
Harvey et al., (1990) determined that the sediment delivery and yield at the damsite
depends on the channel transport capacity in the fan area upstream from the reservoir
rather than the watershed production of sediment. The broad (3,000 to 6,600 feet wide)
alluvial fan contains an unlimited supply of easily mobilized sediment materials. This
result lead to the following approach based on the transport capacity of the channels in
the supply reach. The supply reach is a 4-mile section of the channel considered to be
representative of the channel hydraulic conditions and sediment transport characteristics

TABLE 1
Sediment Surveys for Reservoirs in the Vicinity
of Caliente Creek, Kern County, California,
and Estimated Sediment Yields Based on Various
Computational Methods

Data
Source

See
References

SCS
SCS
CESPK
CESPK
CESPK
CESPK
SCS
Computed

10
10
5
9
9
9
8

Computed
Computed
Computed
Computed

7
7
4
6

Drainage Basin,
Reservoir or
Computational Method Used
Blackburn
Antelope Canyon
Isabella
Pine Flat
Success
Terminus
SCS Yield Map of Western US (HEC)
Integration of the Event Volume vs.
Frequency Curve (HEC)
Flow Duration Method (IIEC)
Dendy & Bolton Method (HEC)
PSIAC Method (HEC)
Kern County Water Agency Study (SLA)

Drainage
Area
mi)

Yield
(AF/sq mi/yr)

7.1
4.4
2,074
1,542
393
560
470

2.20
1.50
0.37
0 20
0.76
0.76
0.47

470
470
470
470
470

0.65
0.90
0.71
0.75
0.97

upstream from the dam site. Single event total sediment volumes were computed for
each of the 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, SPF, and PMF events. The total sediment production
for each event was based on the sediment transport capacity of the alluvial channel
(supply reach) upstream from the reservoir and the flow hydrographs used for each of the
flood events evaluated.
A total sediment load versus percent exceedance curve was developed from these data
and the area under the total load frequency curve was computed to give an estimate for
the expected average annual sediment delivery to the reservoir based on channel transport
capacity upstream from the reservoir. Two different transport relationships were used to
develop the total load curves. The resulting average annual sediment delivery ranged from
0.1 AF/sq mi/yr to 1.0 AF/sq mi/yr due to the differencein transport capacity computed
with the transport functions. Using these results as a representative range in expected
yields based on channel capacity, an average of the two yields seems reasonable.
Therefore, based on the channel transport capacity above the reservoir site and the
estimated total sediment production from a range of single events, an approximate
sediment yield a t the reservoir is 0.55 AF/sq mi/yr. This method does not account for
the additional contribution of sediment from dry ravel erosion, wind-blown sand transport
into the channel or reservoir, channel bank caving, local scour, or toe failure that may
occur along the Sand Hills. Therefore, the sediment yield to the reservoir may be as high
as the higher of the two transport functions predicts, especially during periods of
exceptionally wet years.
The "flow duration sediment discharge rating curve method," (COE, 1989) is a simple
method where the flow duration curve is integrated with the sediment discharge rating
curve developed for the damsite. It is very similar to the method just described, however,
the average annual sediment yield is based on the transport capacity and flow duration
relationship at the darnsite rather than the total event volume frequency. The resulting
annual sediment yield is approximately 438 AF/year, or 0.9 AF/sq mi/yr.
Further exiuninatioa of &the U.S.B.A., SCS (19'75j "Sediment 'field Rates for the
Western United States" shows areas in the vicinity of the proposed damsite with estimated
yields from 0.5 to 1.0 AF/sq mi/yr. These areas may correspond to the broad floodplain
channels (4000 to 6500 feet wide) immediately upstream from the proposed reservoir site.
If that is the case, then the higher yield values estimated with the channel transport
capacity method (1.0 AF/sq mi/yr) and the flow duration method (0.9 AF/sq mi/yr) are
supported by SCS yield mapping estimates.

The Dendy and Bolton (1976) method produces an average annual sediment yield of
approximately 0.71 AF/sq rni/yr for the Caliente Basin at the Sivert damsite, while the
application of PSIAC procedures to the Caliente Creek watershed produces an estimated
average annual sediment yield of 0.75 AF/sq mi/yr at the dam site. These values are
right in line with the range of values predicted from the channel capacity approach and
the measured reservoir accumulation results from Tulare County.
Others (Simons, Li & Associates, 1989) conducted an independent assessment of the
proposed Caliente Creek Project. The authors report the arithmetic average of their yield
estimates (0.97 AF/sq mi/-) in Table 1. Figure 1shows all thirteen yield values and
the drainage basin area associated with each yield. A best fit line through these data
This is more than
points gives an average annual sediment yield of 0.75 M / s q mi/-.
twice the original annual estimate.

Drainage Area in Square Uiles

Figure 1

Measured a n d Computed Values of Average

Annual Sediment Yield Versus Drainage Basin Area
It is important to note that arid and semi-arid basins, such as Caliente Creek, are very
episodic in nature. During dry years (perhaps even normal years) the sediment production
and delivery (and, therefore, annual yield) is small. During large runoff events the
sediment production and delivery can produce tremendous loads of sediment in the
channels. The annual yield during an excessively wet year can be quite high. Therefore,
the presentation of a single average annual yield value may be misleading. For planning
purposes, the consideration of the range of possible annual yields is more meaningful.
Single Event Analyses
In addition to the average annual sediment yield, it is important to estimate the
sediment production and delivery from possible single events ranging from small 5-year
flows to the design event (100 year flood) and, perhaps the SPF and PMF. It is possible
that one or more single events during the design life of the project can significantly affect
the operation and maintenance of the reservoir.
The study reach upstream from the proposed damsite was partitioned into four
different zones or subreaches based on distinct hydraulic and geomorphic characteristics.
The transport capacity is computed for each reach and is compared to the others with
different hydraulic and geomorphic characteristics. The channel averaged sediment grain
size and averaged channel hydraulic conditions for a range of discharges are used with
several different total bed material load transport functions to develop representative water
discharge versus total bed material load relationships for each of the subreaches and flow
conditions.

Table 2 presents the computed sediment inflow to the proposed damsite for the
various flood events. The 100 year flood event can possibly produce enough sediment
during the single design event to remove 43.7 percent of the gross pool storage capacity
(6992 AF). It also suggests that events greater than about the 15 year event can possibly
remove 10 percent or more of the gross pool storage in one 5 day period. This indicates
that the present design capacity of the reservoir may be undersized. The computed total
sediment loads account for the total bed material load with an additional 15 percent
estimated for the wash load. Typical wash loads can account for as much as 90 to 95
percent of the total load in most sand bed rivers (Vanoni, 1975). However, in the Caliente
River Basin the availability of fines (silts and clays) may be limited due to the nature of
the granitic parent materials throughout the basin (see Harvey et al., 1990). The authors
postulate that the wash load near the damsite will have an inverted bed loadlwash load
relationship, and may only account for approximately 15 percent of the total sediment load
being transported by each event.

TABLE 2
Computed Single Event Sediment Inflow t o t h e Proposed
Reservoir a n d Comparison t o Planned Detention
Storage Volume of 16,000 Feet

Event

6
10
20
50
100
SPF

PMF

Total Load
Per Event (acre-feet)
[dry volume]

Percent of the
Planned Detention
Storage Volume
Associated with
Single Event
Sediment Delivery

245
760
1.794
4,709
6,992
11,615
29,440

1.6%
4.8%
1L2%
29.4%
43.7%
72.3%
184.0%

Harvey et al., (1990) estimate that there may have been approximately 9 inches of
sediment deposited in the reach upstream from the Highway 58 crossing during the 1983
flood event That event is estimated to be approximately a 50 year event according to the
Kern County Water Agency. Comparing the total sediment loads entering and leaving the
reach it is seen that there is approximately 575 acre feet more sediment transported into
the reach from the upstream supply reach than leaves the reach. The approximate surface
area of the reach is one square mile (640 acres). Assuming that the 575 acre feet of
sediment deposits uniformly over the reach, this gives an approximate sediment deposition
thickness of 10.8 inches. This matches the observed deposition depth for a 50 year event
reasonably well.
Large events such as a 50 year flood or greater may produce large amounts of sediment
material that enter the water course due to mass wasting, channel bank failure and
erosion of prograded alluvial fans that often extend into the channel in the upper basin.
It may be that single event sediment production can contribute significant quantities of
sediment materials to the reservoir in a short period of time (a few days) and affect the
operation and storage characteristics of the project.

Conclusions
The following conclusions are drawn from the results of this investigation:
1) The morphology of the Caliente Creek drainage basin and the nature of the
sediments delivered to the channels and the potential for sediment storage within
the drainage basin are controlled by the basin geology (Harvey et al., 1990).
2 ) Sediment transport in the basin is episodic and is governed by the occurrence
of large runoff events. Sediment is stored in the broad valley washes (3000 to
6600 feet wide) in the lower portions of the Caliente Basin. There is sufficient
material located in these expansive washes to provide sediment supply to the
lower fan areas somewhat independently of the production and delivery of
sediments from the upper watershed areas. Therefore, sediment yield at the
proposed damsite may be more dependent upon the transport capacity of the
channels and washes upstream from the damsite, than the watershed production
of sediment materials during a flood event.
3) Examination of eight different sources of yield data and methods for estimating
yield a t the damsite concludes that the approximate average annual sediment
yield at the Sivert Reservoir is 0.75 AF/sq mi/yr. This is more than twice the
initial yield estimate developed during the planning studies. Annual sediment
yields can range from 0.47 AF/sq mi/yr to approximately 1.5 AF/sq mi/yr.
4) Single event floods may produce significantly more sediment per event than the
annual sediment yield would indicate. As much as 43 percent of the total gross
pool storage volume (16,000 AF) may be lost due to sediment deposition during
a 100 year event. This would necessitate the removal of approximately 7,000 AF
of sediment material (dry volume) from the reservoir prior to the next flood
season. It also indicates that the design capacity of the reservoir may be
undersized.
Acknowledgements
The study reported herein was conducted by the Hydrologic Engineering Center,
Davis, California at the request of the Sacramento District, Corps of Engineers. The views
expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers.
References
1. Dendy, F.E.and G.C. Bolton (1976). "Sediment Yield - Drainage Area Relationships in the United States,"
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
2. Harvey, Michael D., E.F. Sing and Robert C. MacArthur (1990). "Sediment Sources, Transport and
Delivery to An Alluvial Fan, Caliente Creek, CA," Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Hydraulics and Hydrology of Arid Lands," ASCE, July 30 Aug 2. San Diego, CA.
3. Hydrologic Engineering Center (1990). "Phase 1Sediment Engineering Investigation of the Caliente Creek
Drainage Bash,"F i Proiect Report No. 90-03, prepared for CESPK Sacramento, CA.
4. Pacific Southwest Inter-Agency Committee (1968). Report of the Water Management Subcommittee on
"Factors Affecting Sediment Yield in the Pacit
Southwest Areas and Selection and Evaluation of Measures
for Reduction of Erosion and Sediment Yield," Sedimentation Task Force, PSIAC.
5. Personal Communication with CESPK-ED-H/Herb Hereth (11/21/89).
6. S i o n s , Li & Associates, I n c (1989). "Sedimentation Study of Caliente Creek Watershed, Kern County,
C c a report prepared for Kern County Water Agency, Bakersfield, CA.
7. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1989). "SedimentationInvestigations of Rivers and Reservoirs, Ewineering
Manual EM 1110-2-4000,Office of the Chief of Engineers. Washington, D.C.
8. U.S. Department of Agriculture (1975). "Erosion, Sediment and Related Salt Problems and Treatment
Oooortunities." Soecial Proiects Division. Soil Consemtion Service. Golden CO.
9. U:S. ~ e p a r t m e nof
t ~~riculiure
(1977). "Supplement to Sediment ~ e ~ o s i t i o n -U.S.
i n Reservoirs: Summary
of Data Reported Through 1975," Miscellaneous Publication No. 1362 compiled by the Sedimentation
Committee, Water Resources Council a t the USDA Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS.
10. U.S. Department of Agriculture (1980). 'Watershed Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Tehachapi Watershed," Soil Conservation Service, Tehachapi, CA.
,
Society of Civil Engineers, New York,
11. Vanoni, Vito A., ed. (1975). Sedimentation E n ~ e e r i n gAmerican

NY.

Technical Paper Series

TP-1
TP-2
TP-3
TP-4
TP-5
TP-6
TP-7
TP-8
TP-9
TP-10
TP-11
TP-12
TP-13
TP-14
TP-15
TP-16
TP-17
TP-18
TP-19
TP-20
TP-21
TP-22
TP-23
TP-24
TP-25
TP-26
TP-27
TP-28
TP-29
TP-30
TP-31
TP-32
TP-33
TP-34
TP-35
TP-36
TP-37
TP-38

Use of Interrelated Records to Simulate Streamflow

Optimization Techniques for Hydrologic
Engineering
Methods of Determination of Safe Yield and
Compensation Water from Storage Reservoirs
Functional Evaluation of a Water Resources System
Streamflow Synthesis for Ungaged Rivers
Simulation of Daily Streamflow
Pilot Study for Storage Requirements for Low Flow
Augmentation
Worth of Streamflow Data for Project Design - A
Pilot Study
Economic Evaluation of Reservoir System
Accomplishments
Hydrologic Simulation in Water-Yield Analysis
Survey of Programs for Water Surface Profiles
Hypothetical Flood Computation for a Stream
System
Maximum Utilization of Scarce Data in Hydrologic
Design
Techniques for Evaluating Long-Tem Reservoir
Yields
Hydrostatistics - Principles of Application
A Hydrologic Water Resource System Modeling
Techniques
Hydrologic Engineering Techniques for Regional
Water Resources Planning
Estimating Monthly Streamflows Within a Region
Suspended Sediment Discharge in Streams
Computer Determination of Flow Through Bridges
An Approach to Reservoir Temperature Analysis
A Finite Difference Methods of Analyzing Liquid
Flow in Variably Saturated Porous Media
Uses of Simulation in River Basin Planning
Hydroelectric Power Analysis in Reservoir Systems
Status of Water Resource System Analysis
System Relationships for Panama Canal Water
Supply
System Analysis of the Panama Canal Water
Supply
Digital Simulation of an Existing Water Resources
System
Computer Application in Continuing Education
Drought Severity and Water Supply Dependability
Development of System Operation Rules for an
Existing System by Simulation
Alternative Approaches to Water Resources System
Simulation
System Simulation of Integrated Use of
Hydroelectric and Thermal Power Generation
Optimizing flood Control Allocation for a
Multipurpose Reservoir
Computer Models for Rainfall-Runoff and River
Hydraulic Analysis
Evaluation of Drought Effects at Lake Atitlan
Downstream Effects of the Levee Overtopping at
Wilkes-Barre, PA, During Tropical Storm Agnes
Water Quality Evaluation of Aquatic Systems

TP-39
TP-40
TP-41
TP-42
TP-43
TP-44
TP-45
TP-46
TP-47
TP-48
TP-49
TP-50
TP-51
TP-52
TP-53
TP-54
TP-55
TP-56

TP-57
TP-58
TP-59
TP-60
TP-61
TP-62
TP-63
TP-64
TP-65
TP-66

TP-67
TP-68
TP-69

A Method for Analyzing Effects of Dam Failures in

Design Studies
Storm Drainage and Urban Region Flood Control
Planning
HEC-5C, A Simulation Model for System
Formulation and Evaluation
Optimal Sizing of Urban Flood Control Systems
Hydrologic and Economic Simulation of Flood
Control Aspects of Water Resources Systems
Sizing Flood Control Reservoir Systems by System
Analysis
Techniques for Real-Time Operation of Flood
Control Reservoirs in the Merrimack River Basin
Spatial Data Analysis of Nonstructural Measures
Comprehensive Flood Plain Studies Using Spatial
Data Management Techniques
Direct Runoff Hydrograph Parameters Versus
Urbanization
Experience of HEC in Disseminating Information
on Hydrological Models
Effects of Dam Removal: An Approach to
Sedimentation
Design of Flood Control Improvements by Systems
Analysis: A Case Study
Potential Use of Digital Computer Ground Water
Models
Development of Generalized Free Surface Flow
Models Using Finite Element Techniques
Adjustment of Peak Discharge Rates for
Urbanization
The Development and Servicing of Spatial Data
Management Techniques in the Corps of Engineers
Experiences of the Hydrologic Engineering Center
in Maintaining Widely Used Hydrologic and Water
Resource Computer Models
Flood Damage Assessments Using Spatial Data
Management Techniques
A Model for Evaluating Runoff-Quality in
Metropolitan Master Planning
Testing of Several Runoff Models on an Urban
Watershed
Operational Simulation of a Reservoir System with
Pumped Storage
Technical Factors in Small Hydropower Planning
Flood Hydrograph and Peak Flow Frequency
Analysis
HEC Contribution to Reservoir System Operation
Determining Peak-Discharge Frequencies in an
Urbanizing Watershed: A Case Study
Feasibility Analysis in Small Hydropower Planning
Reservoir Storage Determination by Computer
Simulation of Flood Control and Conservation
Systems
Hydrologic Land Use Classification Using
LANDSAT
Interactive Nonstructural Flood-Control Planning
Critical Water Surface by Minimum Specific
Energy Using the Parabolic Method

TP-70
TP-71
TP-72

TP-73
TP-74
TP-75
TP-76
TP-77
TP-78
TP-79

TP-80
TP-81
TP-82
TP-83
TP-84
TP-85
TP-86
TP-87
TP-88
TP-89
TP-90
TP-91
TP-92
TP-93

TP-94
TP-95
TP-96
TP-97
TP-98

TP-99
TP-100
TP-101
TP-102
TP-103
TP-104

Corps of Engineers Experience with Automatic

Calibration of a Precipitation-Runoff Model
Determination of Land Use from Satellite Imagery
for Input to Hydrologic Models
Application of the Finite Element Method to
Vertically Stratified Hydrodynamic Flow and Water
Quality
Flood Mitigation Planning Using HEC-SAM
Hydrographs by Single Linear Reservoir Model
HEC Activities in Reservoir Analysis
Institutional Support of Water Resource Models
Investigation of Soil Conservation Service Urban
Hydrology Techniques
Potential for Increasing the Output of Existing
Hydroelectric Plants
Potential Energy and Capacity Gains from Flood
Control Storage Reallocation at Existing U.S.
Hydropower Reservoirs
Use of Non-Sequential Techniques in the Analysis
of Power Potential at Storage Projects
Data Management Systems of Water Resources
Planning
The New HEC-1 Flood Hydrograph Package
River and Reservoir Systems Water Quality
Modeling Capability
Generalized Real-Time Flood Control System
Model
Operation Policy Analysis: Sam Rayburn
Reservoir
Training the Practitioner: The Hydrologic
Engineering Center Program
Documentation Needs for Water Resources Models
Reservoir System Regulation for Water Quality
Control
A Software System to Aid in Making Real-Time
Water Control Decisions
Calibration, Verification and Application of a TwoDimensional Flow Model
HEC Software Development and Support
Hydrologic Engineering Center Planning Models
Flood Routing Through a Flat, Complex Flood
Plain Using a One-Dimensional Unsteady Flow
Computer Program
Dredged-Material Disposal Management Model
Infiltration and Soil Moisture Redistribution in
HEC-1
The Hydrologic Engineering Center Experience in
Nonstructural Planning
Prediction of the Effects of a Flood Control Project
on a Meandering Stream
Evolution in Computer Programs Causes Evolution
in Training Needs: The Hydrologic Engineering
Center Experience
Reservoir System Analysis for Water Quality
Probable Maximum Flood Estimation - Eastern
United States
Use of Computer Program HEC-5 for Water Supply
Analysis
Role of Calibration in the Application of HEC-6
Engineering and Economic Considerations in
Formulating
Modeling Water Resources Systems for Water
Quality

TP-105
TP-106
TP-107
TP-108
TP-109
TP-110
TP-111
TP-112
TP-113
TP-114
TP-115
TP-116
TP-117
TP-118
TP-119
TP-120
TP-121

TP-122
TP-123
TP-124
TP-125
TP-126
TP-127
TP-128
TP-129

TP-130
TP-131
TP-132

TP-133
TP-134
TP-135
TP-136
TP-137
TP-138
TP-139
TP-140
TP-141

Use of a Two-Dimensional Flow Model to Quantify

Aquatic Habitat
Flood-Runoff Forecasting with HEC-1F
Dredged-Material Disposal System Capacity
Expansion
Role of Small Computers in Two-Dimensional
Flow Modeling
One-Dimensional Model for Mud Flows
Subdivision Froude Number
HEC-5Q: System Water Quality Modeling
New Developments in HEC Programs for Flood
Control
Modeling and Managing Water Resource Systems
for Water Quality
Accuracy of Computer Water Surface Profiles Executive Summary
Application of Spatial-Data Management
Techniques in Corps Planning
The HEC's Activities in Watershed Modeling
HEC-1 and HEC-2 Applications on the
Microcomputer
Real-Time Snow Simulation Model for the
Monongahela River Basin
Multi-Purpose, Multi-Reservoir Simulation on a PC
Technology Transfer of Corps' Hydrologic Models
Development, Calibration and Application of
Runoff Forecasting Models for the Allegheny River
Basin
The Estimation of Rainfall for Flood Forecasting
Using Radar and Rain Gage Data
Developing and Managing a Comprehensive
Reservoir Analysis Model
Review of U.S. Army corps of Engineering
Involvement With Alluvial Fan Flooding Problems
An Integrated Software Package for Flood Damage
Analysis
The Value and Depreciation of Existing Facilities:
The Case of Reservoirs
Floodplain-Management Plan Enumeration
Two-Dimensional Floodplain Modeling
Status and New Capabilities of Computer Program
HEC-6: "Scour and Deposition in Rivers and
Reservoirs"
Estimating Sediment Delivery and Yield on
Alluvial Fans
Hydrologic Aspects of Flood Warning Preparedness Programs
Twenty-five Years of Developing, Distributing, and
Supporting Hydrologic Engineering Computer
Programs
Predicting Deposition Patterns in Small Basins
Annual Extreme Lake Elevations by Total
Probability Theorem
A Muskingum-Cunge Channel Flow Routing
Method for Drainage Networks
Prescriptive Reservoir System Analysis Model Missouri River System Application
A Generalized Simulation Model for Reservoir
System Analysis
The HEC NexGen Software Development Project
Issues for Applications Developers
HEC-2 Water Surface Profiles Program
HEC Models for Urban Hydrologic Analysis

TP-142
TP-143
TP-144
TP-145
TP-146
TP-147
TP-148
TP-149
TP-150
TP-151
TP-152

Systems Analysis Applications at the Hydrologic

Engineering Center
Runoff Prediction Uncertainty for Ungauged
Agricultural Watersheds
Review of GIS Applications in Hydrologic
Modeling
Application of Rainfall-Runoff Simulation for
Flood Forecasting
Application of the HEC Prescriptive Reservoir
Model in the Columbia River Systems
HEC River Analysis System (HEC-RAS)
HEC-6: Reservoir Sediment Control Applications
The Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS):
Design and Development Issues
The HEC Hydrologic Modeling System
Bridge Hydraulic Analysis with HEC-RAS
Use of Land Surface Erosion Techniques with
Stream Channel Sediment Models

TP-153
TP-154
TP-155
TP-156
TP-157
TP-158
TP-159
TP-160

TP-161

Risk-Based Analysis for Corps Flood Project

Studies - A Status Report
Modeling Water-Resource Systems for Water
Quality Management
Runoff simulation Using Radar Rainfall Data
Status of HEC Next Generation Software
Development
Unsteady Flow Model for Forecasting Missouri and
Mississippi Rivers
Corps Water Management System (CWMS)
Some History and Hydrology of the Panama Canal
Application of Risk-Based Analysis to Planning
Reservoir and Levee Flood Damage Reduction
Systems
Corps Water Management System - Capabilities
and Implementation Status