USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

Scientific Investigations  Report 2007-5135 

### Prepared in cooperation with the  Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

## Development of Relations of Stream Stage to Channel Geometry and Discharge for Stream Segments Simulated with Hydrologic Simulation Program–Fortran (HSPF), Chesapeake Bay Watershed and Adjacent Parts of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware

By Douglas L. Moyer and Mark R. Bennett 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5135

----

|  | PDF Full report (6 MB)		  Appendixes 1-5 are included in the PDF file. Appendixes 2-5, below, contain programs for downloading.		  

Appendix 2. **XSECT Program for the Appalachian Plateaus Physiographic Province**        (Executable program, Fortran code file, documentation file, and example input file)

Appendix 3. **XSECT Program for the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province**                  (Executable program, Fortran code file, documentation file, and example input file)

Appendix 4. **XSECT Program for the Piedmont Physiographic Province**        (Executable program, Fortran code file, documentation file, and example input file)

Appendix 5. **XSECT Program for the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province**		(Executable program, Fortran code file, documentation file, and example input file) |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

### Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Environmental    Protection Agency (USEPA), Chesapeake Bay Program    (CBP), Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB), Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VADCR), and University of Maryland (UMD) are collaborating  to improve the resolution of the Chesapeake Bay Regional Watershed Model (CBRWM). This watershed model uses the Hydrologic Simulation Program–Fortran (HSPF) to simulate the fate and transport of nutrients and sediment throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed and extended areas of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Information from the CBRWM is used by the CBP and other watershed managers to assess the effectiveness of water-quality improvement efforts as well as guide future management activities.

    A critical step in the improvement of the CBRWM framework was the development of an HSPF function table (FTABLE) for each represented stream channel. The FTABLE is used to relate stage (water depth) in a particular stream channel to associated channel surface area, channel volume, and discharge (streamflow). The primary tool used to generate an FTABLE for each stream channel is the XSECT program, a computer program that requires nine input variables used to represent channel morphology. These input variables are reach length, upstream and downstream elevation, channel bottom width, channel bankfull width, channel bankfull stage, slope of the floodplain, and Manning’s roughness coefficient for the channel and floodplain. For the purpose of this study, the nine input variables were grouped into three categories: channel geometry, Manning’s roughness coefficient, and channel and floodplain slope. Values of channel geometry for every stream segment represented in CBRWM were obtained by first developing    regional regression models that relate basin drainage area to observed values of bankfull width, bankfull depth, and bottom width at each of the 290 USGS streamflow-gaging stations    included in the areal extent of the model. These regression    models were developed on the basis of data from stations in four physiographic provinces (Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain) and were used to predict channel geometry for all 738 stream segments in the modeled area from associated basin drainage area. Manning’s roughness coefficient for the channel and floodplain was represented    in the XSECT program in two forms. First, all available    field-estimated values of roughness were compiled for gaging stations in each physiographic province. The median of field-estimated values of channel and floodplain roughness for each physiographic province was applied to all respective stream segments. The second representation of Manning’s roughness coefficient was to allow roughness to vary with channel depth. Roughness was estimated at each gaging station    for each 1-foot depth interval. Median values of roughness were calculated for each 1-foot depth interval for all stations in each physiographic province. Channel and floodplain slope were determined for every stream segment in CBRWM using the USGS National Elevation Dataset.

    Function tables were generated by the XSECT program using values of channel geometry, channel and floodplain roughness, and channel and floodplain slope. The FTABLEs for each of the 290 USGS streamflow-gaging stations were evaluated by comparing observed discharge to the XSECT-    derived discharge. Function table stream discharge derived using depth-varying roughness was found to be more representative    of and statistically indistinguishable from values of observed stream discharge. Additionally, results of regression analysis showed that XSECT-derived discharge accounted for approximately 90 percent of the variability associated with observed discharge in each of the four physiographic provinces.    The results of this study indicate that the methodology developed to generate FTABLEs for every simulated stream segment in the CBRWM is appropriate. Additionally, the methodology developed in this study can be applied to stream-channel representation in association with other modeling efforts such as Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development    and other watershed-scale water-quality assessments.

### Contents

Abstract

Introduction

Physical Setting

Physiography

Appalachian Plateaus Physiographic Province

Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province

Blue Ridge Physiographic Province

Piedmont Physiographic Province

Coastal Plain Physiographic Province

HSPF Function Table Development

XSECT Program

Estimation of Channel Geometry

Station Selection

Identification of Bankfull Stage

Identification of Bankfull Width and Bottom Width

Estimation of Manning’s *n*

Determination of Channel Slope, Floodplain Slope, and Watershed Drainage Area

Evaluation of HSPF Function Tables

Direction of Future Research

Summary and Application

Acknowledgments

References Cited

 Appendix 1. XSECT Input Parameters for Chesapeake Bay Regional Watershed Model Reaches in the Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain Physiographic Provinces

Appendix 2. XSECT Program for the Appalachian Plateaus Physiographic Province

Appendix 3. XSECT Program for the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province

Appendix 4. XSECT Program for the Piedmont Physiographic Province

Appendix 5. XSECT Program for the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province

### Figures

1–2. Maps showing—

    1. The region included in the Chesapeake Bay Regional Watershed Model,    highlighting the major river basins and the associated stream-reach network

    2. Physiographic provinces represented and streamflow-gaging stations used in    HSPF function table development in the Chesapeake Bay Regional     Watershed Model

    3. Diagram showing theoretical stream channel as represented in the XSECT program    by bankfull stage (H), bankfull width (BFW), bottom width (BW), upstream elevation (US ELEV), downstream elevation (DS ELEV), and slope of the floodplain (SFP)

    4–18. Graphs showing—

    4. Relation of bankfull stage to basin drainage area for streamflow-gaging    stations in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge, (C) Piedmont,    and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    5. Regression residuals for predicted minus observed bankfull stage relative to    basin drainage area in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge,    (C) Piedmont, and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    6. Relation of bankfull width to basin drainage area for streamflow-gaging    stations in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge, (C) Piedmont,    and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    7. Regression residuals for predicted minus observed bankfull width relative to    basin drainage area in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge,    (C) Piedmont, and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    8. Relation of bottom width to basin drainage area for streamflow-gaging    stations in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge, (C) Piedmont,    and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    9. Regression residuals for predicted minus observed bottom width relative    to basin drainage area in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge,    (C) Piedmont, and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    10. Model observed depth-varying channel roughness for streamflow-gaged    streams in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge, (C) Piedmont,    and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    11. Cumulative distribution plots for observed and simulated discharge for    streamflow-gaging stations in the Coastal Plain physiographic province

    12. Cumulative distribution plots for observed and simulated discharge for    streamflow-gaging stations in the Piedmont physiographic province

    13. Cumulative distribution plots for observed and simulated discharge for    streamflow-gaging stations in the Valley and Ridge physiographic province

    14. Cumulative distribution plots for observed and simulated discharge for    streamflow-gaging stations in the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province

    15. Relation of XSECT-simulated discharge to observed discharge for streamflow-    gaging stations in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge,    (C) Piedmont, and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    16. Regression residuals for simulated minus observed discharge relative to    simulated discharge in the (A) Appalachian Plateaus, (B) Valley and Ridge,     (C) Piedmont, and (D) Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

    17. Relation of (A) bankfull stage, (B) bankfull width, and (C) bottom width to basin    drainage area for streamflow-gaging stations in the Appalachian Plateaus,    Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, Coastal Plain, and physiographic provinces

    18. Distribution of regression residuals for predicted minus observed (A) bankfull    stage, (B) bankfull width, and (C) bottom width for streamflow-gaging stations in    the Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain    physiographic provinces

### Tables

1. Example Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran function table

2. Required input parameters and associated format as required by the    XSECT program

3. Streamflow-gaging stations and associated basin and channel characteristics    used for the development of regional models to predict channel geometry

    4. Regional regression equations, relating channel geometry to basin drainage    area, and associated diagnostic statistics, for streamflow-gaging stations in the    Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain    physiographic provinces

    5. Descriptive statistics for field-estimated values of Manning’s roughness coefficient associated with the channel and flooplain for streamflow-gaging stations in the    Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain    physiographic provinces

    6. Equations and diagnostic statistics regression analysis relating simulated and observed stream discharge for streamflow-gaging stations in the Appalachian    Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, Coastal Plain, and physiographic provinces

    7. Regression equations, relating channel geometry to basin drainage area and    associated diagnostic statistics for streamflow-gaging stations in the Appalachian Plateaus, Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain physiographic provinces

### Suggested Citation 

Moyer, D.L., and Bennett, M.R., 2007, Development of relations of stream stage to channel geometry and  discharge for stream segments simulated with Hydrologic Simulation Program–Fortran (HSPF), Chesapeake Bay Watershed and adjacent parts of Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5135, 83 p.

----

If you have Adobe Acrobat or  Adobe Reader    installed on your computer, you may view and print the PDF version of this     report. Acrobat Reader, is a free download from  Adobe Systems, Inc. Users with disabilities can view information concerning     accessibility at access.Adobe.com. 

----

For further information, contact:

Mark R. Bennett, Director      U.S. Geological Survey      Virginia Water Science Center      1730 East Parham Rd.    Richmond, VA 23228

 or visit our Web site at:http://va.water.usgs.gov

----

U.S. Department of the Interior |	U.S. Geological Survey	Persistent URL: https://pubs.water.usgs.gov/sir2007-5135	Page Contact Information: Publishing Services	Page Last Modified: Thursday, 01-Dec-2016 19:48:46 EST

----