×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Trying to reproduce another engineer's results

Trying to reproduce another engineer's results

Trying to reproduce another engineer's results

(OP)
See the attached file.  First page is their hydrograph, second page is my hydrograph.  I'm looking for a combination of HydroCAD settings than can best emulate the other engineer's (Hydraflow Hydrographs) results, and can't seem to get it any closer than 5%, which seems like too big a bust to me.  I'd be happy with 1% or 2%, but 5% makes me feel like I'm missing something.  If they made some weird assumptions to get their number, I need to figure out what those weird assumptions were.  I find it especially fishy that our peak discharges are off by 5% even though our total runoff volumes are within 0.008% of each other.  

So far I've tried varying my calculation interval, which didn't help much if at all, and using the Georgia 484 unit hydro, which helped a little but not enough.  I cant find a way to get my model to match his number without monkeying with my Ia/S ratio, (not shown on his printout) but I don't think he would have done that for his report.

(note, I realize our Tcs are off by 0.03 mins, I checked that and it doesn't fundamentally change the results)

 

Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East - http://www.campbellcivil.com

RE: Trying to reproduce another engineer's results

The matching volumes suggest that the CN and Ia/S ratio are probably the  same.  Since the volumes match, but the peaks are different, there is probably a difference in one of the time factors, such as the Tc, Unit Hydrograph, or rainfall distribution.

The Tc seems to match, so I would suspect the use of a (slightly) different Unit Hydrograph or rainfall distribution.  I would get the actual rainfall table that was used in the Hydraflow calculation and compare it to the HydroCAD data.  There have been slight changes to the Type II storm over the years, and there is always the possibility that someone has altered the standard table.

For short Tc values, the peak runoff is especially sensitive to the time step that is used to define the rainfall distribution.  To address this, HydroCAD uses a polynomial form of the Type II distribution which provides good accuracy (slightly higher peaks) for small Tc values.  But this is the opposite of the difference you're seeing.  For comparison, I tried the tabular form of the Type II distribution with HydroCAD, and this gives an (even) lower peak, as expected, so it doesn't shed any light on this difference.
 

Peter Smart
HydroCAD Software
www.hydrocad.net
 

RE: Trying to reproduce another engineer's results

HydroCAD runoff calculations have been extensively cross-checked against TR-20, and generally match the TR-20 runoff volumes and peaks to within 1%.  (Of course, this assumes that all the input parameters are the same)

Although I've already summarized the potential issues in this particular case, the following web page provides a more general guide to comparing runoff results:

www.hydrocad.net/scsresults.htm
 

Peter Smart
HydroCAD Software
www.hydrocad.net
 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close