Physically Based Estimation of Maximum Precipitation over American River Watershed, California
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 16, Issue 4
Abstract
A methodology for maximum precipitation (MP) estimation that uses a physically based numerical atmospheric model is proposed in this paper. As a case study, the model-based 72-h MP was estimated for the American River watershed (ARW) in California for the December 1996–January 1997 flood event. First, a regional atmospheric model, MM5, was calibrated and validated for the December 1996–January 1997 historical major storm event for the ARW, on the basis of the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) reanalysis data to demonstrate the model capability during the historical period. Then, the model-simulated historical storm event was maximized by modifying its boundary conditions. The model-simulated precipitation field in the ARW was successfully validated at nine individual rain gauge stations in the watershed. The computed basin-averaged precipitation was somewhat higher than observations obtained by the spatial interpolation of the rain gauge observations. This result suggests a limitation of the spatial interpolation of ground rain gauge observations because they are mostly located in valleys, and the distribution of precipitation is highly heterogeneous over the mountainous terrain of the ARW. Next, to maximize precipitation over the watershed, the initial and boundary conditions in the outer nesting domain of the atmospheric model were modified. In this demonstrative study, the boundary conditions were modified by three methods: (1) maximizing the atmospheric moisture by setting the relative humidity at 100%; (2) maintaining the atmospheric boundary conditions corresponding to the state of the heaviest precipitation (maintaining equilibrium conditions); and (3) spatially shifting the atmospheric conditions to render the atmospheric moisture flux to hit the watershed. Because these modifications significantly increased the precipitation over the ARW, they clearly show the importance of wind and moisture conditions at the boundary of the atmospheric modeling domain. These different maximization methods produced similar 72-h precipitation depths, which were 549 mm by the combination of 100% relative humidity and equilibrium high precipitation conditions at the outer boundary of the model domain, and 541 mm from shifting the historical atmospheric conditions to the south by 5.0°. Accordingly, the 72-h maximum precipitation over the ARW was estimated to be approximately 550 mm. Although this study presents only a demonstrative maximization work, it shows that the presented modeling approach can be a potential alternative to standard probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimation without depending on the linear relationships required in the standard PMP method. Also, because the proposed modeling approach is based on the initial and boundary atmospheric conditions from a synoptic scale that may be obtained from the NCAR/National Centers for Environmental Prediction reanalysis data for the historical period and from the general circulation model (GCM) climate projections, it can account for any nonstationarity that may be present in the hydro-climate system.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by Award No. UNSPECIFIED923 from SAFCA, and this support is gratefully acknowledged. However, the views expressed in this study belong totally to the writers.
References
Abbs, D. J. (1999). “A numerical modeling study to investigate the assumptions used in the calculation of probable maximum precipitation.” Water Resour. Res., 35(3), 785–796.
American Meteorological Society. (1959). Glossary of Meteorology, Boston, MA.
Anthes, R. A., and Warner, T. T. (1978). “Development of hydrodynamic models suitable for air pollution and other mesometeorological studies.” Mon. Weather Rev., 106, 1045–1078.
Ballard, S. P., Golding, B. W., and Smith, R. N. (1991). “Mesoscale model experimental forecasts of the haar of northeast Scotland.” Mon. Weather Rev., 119, 2107–2123.
Bergeron, T. (1965). “On the low-level redistribution of atmospheric water caused by orography.” Proc., Int. Cloud Physics Conf., Supplement, Tokyo, Int. Association of Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics and World Meteorological Organization, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, and Geneva, 96–100.
Corrigan, P., Fenn, D. D., Kluck, D. R., and Vogel, J. L. (1999). “Probable maximum precipitation for California.” Hydrometeorological Rep. No. 59., National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Daly, C., Neilson, R. P., and Phillips, D. L. (1994). “A statistical-topographic model for mapping climatological precipitation over mountanous terrain.” J. Appl. Meteorol., 33, 140–158.
Dudhia, J. (1996). “A multi-layer soil temperature model for MM5.” Preprints, 6th PSU/NCAR Mesoscale Model Users’ Workshop, 22–24 July 1996, NCAR, Boulder, CO, 49–50.
Grell, G. A., Dudhia, J., and Stauffer, D. R. (1994). “A description of the fifth-generation Penn State/NCAR mesoscale model (MM5).” NCAR/TN-398+STR, NCAR, Boulder, CO.
Hansen, E. M., Fenn, L. C., Schreiner, R. W., Stodt, R. W., and Miller, J. F. (1988). “Probable maximum precipitation estimates—United States between the Continental Divide and the 103rd meridian.” Hydrometeorological Rep. No. 55A, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Hansen, E. M., Schreiner, L. C., and Miller, J. F. (1982). “Application of probable maximum precipitation estimates, United States east of the 105th meridian.” Hydrometeorological Rep. No. 52, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Hersfield, D. M. (1961). “Estimating the probable maximum precipitation.” J. Hydraul. Div., 87(HY5), 99–116.
Hobbs, P. V. (1989). “Research on clouds and precipitation: Past, present, and future, part 1.” Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 70, 282–285.
Hong, S.-Y., and Pan, H.-L. (1996). “Nonlocal boundary layer vertical diffusion in a medium-range forecast model.” Mon. Weather Rev., 124, 2322–2339.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2007). IPCC fourth scientific assessment report (AR4), S. Solomon et al., eds., Cambridge Univ., Cambridge, UK.
Kain, J. S., and Fritsch, J. M. (1993). “Convective parameterization for mesoscale models: The Kain-Fritsch scheme.” The representation of cumulus convection in numerical models, K. A. Emanuel and D. J. Raymond, eds., American Meteorological Society, Boston.
Miller, J. F., Frederick, R. H., and Tracey, R. J. (1973). “Precipitation frequency atlas of the Western United States.” NOAA Atlas 2, 11, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Milly, P. C. D., et al. (2008). “Stationarity is dead: Whiter water management?” Science, 319, 573–574.
Myers, V. A. (1967). “Estimation of extreme precipitation for spillway design floods.” Tech. Mem. WBTM HYDRO-5, U.S. Weather Bureau, Washington, DC.
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). (2005). PSU/NCAR mesoscale modeling system tutorial class notes and user’s guide: MM5 modeling system version 3, Boulder, CO, 8–13.
Papalexiou, S. M., and Koutsoyiannis, D. (2006). “A probabilistic approach to the concept of probable maximum precipitation.” Adv. Geosci., 7, 51–54.
Reisner, J., Rasmussen, R. J., and Bruintjes, R. T. (1998). “Explicit forecasting of supercooled liquid water in winter storms using the MM5 mesoscale model.” Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 124B, 1071–1107.
Roos, M. (2003). “Extreme precipitation in the American River basin.” Proc., California Extreme Precipitation Symp., American River Watershed Institute, Sacramento, CA.
Shafran, P. C., Seaman, N. L., and Gayno, G. A. (2000). “Evaluation of numerical predictions of boundary layer structure during the Lake Michigan Ozone Study.” J. Appl. Meteorol., 39, 412–426.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2001). American River basin, California, Folsom Dam and Lake, revised PMF study, Sacramento, CA.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2005). Stochastic modeling of extreme floods on the American River at Folsom Dam—Flood-frequency curve extension, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). (2006). American River Watershed Project, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA.
U.S. Weather Bureau (USWB). (1961). “Interim report—Probable maximum precipitation in California.” Hydrometeorological Rep. No. 36, Hydrometeorological Section, Washington, DC.
Weaver, R. L. (1962). “Meteorology of hydrologically critical storms in California.” Hydrometeorological Rep. No. 37, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Washington, DC.
World Meteorological Organization (WMO). (1973). “Manual for estimation of probable maximum precipitation.” Operation Hydrology Rep. No. 1; WMO, No. 332, Geneva.
World Meteorological Organization (WMO). (1986). “Manual for estimation of probable maximum precipitation.” Operation Hydrology Rep. No. 1; WMO, No. 332, 2nd Ed., Geneva.
Zhu, Y., and Newell, R. E. (1998). “A proposed algorithm for moisture fluxes from atmospheric rivers.” Mon. Weather Rev., 126, 725–735.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2011 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 16, 2010
Accepted: Aug 21, 2010
Published online: Mar 15, 2011
Published in print: Apr 1, 2011
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.