Noted that most of LID do not present any significant impact on Q-100 reductions at all.
Of course, if SWMM is chosen for both flood control planning and on-site LID, it is recommended that the KW routing be used for a conservative watershed-wide planning, and later on, the DW routing be used for each on-site LID designs. These two models must be used at the different times during the course of watershed development, and for different purposes. As a result, the entire watershed MUST be modeled for its flood control master plan while all on-site individual lot developments MUST be "re-studied" with the known detailed on-site layout using SWMM. With the latest development in LID applications, SWMM is a great tool to model "all runoff events" (from micro, minor to major events) from small on-site LID catchments, while HMS is a good model for major event predictions (MASTER FLOOD CONTROL PLANNING) from a large tributary area.Īs recommended, all LID be designed for 3 to 6-month events, and all flood-control facilities be designed for 50- to 100-yr events. The Clean Water Act has created two layers of efforts in storm runoff management: (1) Water Quality to cope with frequent runoff events from urban areas and (2) Flood Control to pass the extreme events through the entire watershed. Many students asked the same question as to why SWMM and why not HEC HMS? As far as I can recall, the following is my brief to my class: I taught SWMM as a graduate class in the last semester. Of course, others may have different experiences, and I am sure you'll get many of them. In these cases I've seen where people have recommended using SWMM5 for channel flow hydraulics modeling simply for numerical stability purposes. However, for hydrodynamic modeling, the unsteady solution for HEC-RAS seems to be less reliable, particularly for steep grades and fast changes in flow (e.g.
That's not to say you couldn't do it with SWMM, but the workflow would likely be a little more cumbersome. In general, HEC-RAS and the tools that support it seem to be better suited for flood mapping and analysis, particularly if it is steady-state analysis. If you are doing floodplain mapping for FEMA purposes, then HEC-RAS is likely most suitable because it seems the majority of the floodplain mapping standards have been developed in coordinate with HEC-RAS functionality (or vice versa.chicken and egg thing.). As such, the GUI tools, model setup processes and methodology, and the 'special features' of each program will generally favor the application for which it was originally designed. However, in general SWMM (and the various GUIs that support it) was developed for evaluating stormwater runoff hydrology and stormwater drainage and collection systems in an urban setting, while HEC-RAS was developed for evaluating stormwater runoff hydrology and river hydraulics.
PCSWMM 6.0 FREE
Can anyone make a case for SWMM5 (or any other program) overīoth SWMM and HEC-RAS are 1D free surface flow models so there is a lot of overlapping applications where they are both capable of providing answers. That HEC-RAS and HEC-HMS is the way to go but I’m definitely open to Primary reasons for HEC-HMS and HEC-RAS existence, I’m inclined to think Large, mostly rural watershed? I would also likely need to model floodĭepths and inundation boundaries. Of a decentralized and distributed storage system (such as storage inįarmers’ fields, tanks, microdams, etc.) on peak flows and volumes in a (SPECIFIC) What program(s) would you recommend to model the impact.Other programs (in particular, HEC programs)? Conversely, what situationsĪre better suited for other types of models (in particular, HEC programs)? (GENERAL) Under what conditions would you recommend SWMM5 over.I have two questions, one generalĪnd one specific, regarding the selection of hydrologic and hydraulic I’m a new user to SWMM5/PCSWMM (I just finished an introductory course withĬHI) and I was hoping some people in this group could give some insight
0 kommentar(er)
