Alafia River Minimum Flows and Levels - Southwest Florida Water ...
Alafia River Minimum Flows and Levels - Southwest Florida Water ... Alafia River Minimum Flows and Levels - Southwest Florida Water ...
modeling was used to characterize potential changes in the availability of fish habitat and macroinvertebrate diversity. Recent and Long-term Positional Hydrograph (RALPH) analysis was used to examine inundation durations for specific habitats or floodplain elevations and to also examine changes in inundation patterns that could be expected with changes to the flow regime. 4.3.1 HEC-RAS Modeling The HEC-RAS model is a one-dimensional hydraulic model that can be used to analyze river flows. Version 3.1.1 of the HEC-RAS model was released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center in November 2002 and supports water surface profile calculations for steady and unsteady flows, including subcritical, supercritical, or mixed flows. Profile computations begin at a cross-section with known or assumed starting condition and proceed upstream for subcritical flow or downstream for supercritical flow. The model solves the one-dimensional energy equation. Energy losses between two neighboring cross sections are computed by Manning's equation in the case of frictional losses and derived from a coefficient multiplied by the change in velocity head for contraction/expansion losses. For areas where the water surface profile changes rapidly (e.g., hydraulic jump, bridges, river confluences), the momentum equation is used (US Army Corps of Engineers 2002). We used the HEC-RAS model and available flow records for the USGS Lithia gage to simulate flows at cross-section sites within the Alafia River corridor. Data required for performing HEC-RAS simulations included geometric data and steady flow data. Geometric data consisted of connectivity data for the river system, cross-section elevation data, reach length, energy loss coefficients due to friction and channel contraction/expansion, stream junction information, and hydraulic structure data, including information for bridges, culverts, etc. Required steady-flow data included the flow regime and boundary conditions. Calculations for subcritical flow begin downstream where a boundary condition is applied. For the Alafia River corridor, a known water-surface elevation, calculated from a stage-discharge relationship at the USGS Lithia gage, was used as a downstream boundary condition. The energy equation is then solved between the first and second (most downstream) cross sections. Once this is achieved, the model repeats this process working its way upstream balancing the energy equation (or momentum equation if appropriate) between adjacent cross sections until the most upstream cross section is reached. Model accuracy is evaluated by comparing calculated water-surface elevations at any gage locations with a stage-discharge relationship derived from historic data at that location. The model is calibrated by adjusting factors in the model until the calculated results closely approximate the observed relationship between stage and flow. While expansion and contraction coefficients can be altered, the 4-10
major parameter altered during the calibration process is typically Manning's roughness coefficient (n), which describes the degree of flow resistance. Flow resistance is a function of a variety of factors including sediment composition, channel geometry, vegetation density, depth of flow and channel meandering. Generally, the model is considered calibrated when model results are within 0.5 ft of the established stage-discharge relationship at the upstream gage site(s) (Murphy et al. 1978; Lewelling 2003). The HEC-RAS model for the Alafia River was originally set-up and run by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and was transferred to the Southwest Florida Water Management District. The modeled area included the North and South Prongs of the river and the USGS Lithia gage. In 2003, the District conducted surveys at additional cross sections in the Alafia River to obtain additional input data for the model. The original USGS Alafia River HEC-RAS model calculates profiles for a total of 16 steady flow rates. These rates represent the 89.1, 89, 50.1, 50, 30.1, 30, 20.1, 20, 10.1, 10, 2.1, 2, 0.51, 0.5, 0.11, and 0.1 upper percentiles of the historical flow data for the river. Boundary conditions were specified with known water surface elevations (rating curves) for each flow rate at the downstream boundary (USGS Lithia Gage). The smallest (lowest) flow in the original USGS Alafia River HEC-RAS model was the 89.1 upper percentile (or 10.9 percentile) flow. To establish minimum flows for the river, it was necessary to evaluate conditions associated with smaller flows. For this purpose, 23 additional low steady flow rates were added to the calculations for the river segment. The 23 additional flows added to the calculation were 8, 16, 25, 33, 39, 48, 57, 65, 81, 91, 104, 112, 138, 205, 248, 298, 399, 505, 666, 885, 1280, 1820 and 2850 cfs at the USGS Lithia gage. Because some of the cross-sections generated by the SWFWMD surveys were designed to examine in-stream habitat, they failed to extend significantly into the floodplain. This resulted in the highest surveyed elevation in the cross-section being considerably lower than the water surface elevations associated with some of the modeled flows. To eliminate errors in model output that would be associated with use of the truncated cross-sectional data, a second model that excluded the truncated cross-sections was generated. The original model was termed the channel model and was used to analyze flows for elevations confined within the banks. The second model was termed the floodplain model and was applied when analyzing out of bank flows. The HEC-RAS models were run using all flows to determine stage vs. flow and wetted perimeter vs. flow relationships for each cross-section. These relationships were also used to determine inundation characteristics of various habitats at instream habitat and floodplain vegetation cross-sections. The peer review panel assessing the "Upper Peace River; An Analysis of Minimum Flows 4-11
- Page 75 and 76: Alafia River at Lithia - Water Qual
- Page 77 and 78: South Prong Watershed Above USGS Ga
- Page 79 and 80: Comparisons of land use changes and
- Page 81 and 82: Comparison of Median Daily Flows fo
- Page 83 and 84: Comparisons of Annual 25% Exceedanc
- Page 85 and 86: Figure 2-25. Lithia Springs Major b
- Page 87 and 88: 2.3.4.3.2 Discharge from Lithia Spr
- Page 89 and 90: Relationship Between Lithia Springs
- Page 91 and 92: Buckhorn Spring Main Discharge (Wit
- Page 93 and 94: versus flow. The third plot typical
- Page 95 and 96: Alafia River at Lithia, FL Phosphor
- Page 97 and 98: While elevated phosphorus concentra
- Page 99 and 100: Peace River at Arcadia, FL 20 Phosp
- Page 101 and 102: Alafia River at Lithia, FL Nitrate/
- Page 103 and 104: 2.4.2 Potassium and Trend Analysis
- Page 105 and 106: Alafia River at Lithia, FL 14 Potas
- Page 107 and 108: Table 2-10. Results of Kendall's ta
- Page 109 and 110: Chapter 3 Ecological Resources of C
- Page 111 and 112: 1) maintenance of minimum water dep
- Page 113 and 114: flow regimes and these life history
- Page 115 and 116: subsidy of water and nutrients that
- Page 117 and 118: Chapter 4 Technical Approach for Es
- Page 119 and 120: 4.2.1 HEC-RAS Cross-Sections Cross
- Page 121 and 122: PHABSIM analysis required acquisiti
- Page 123 and 124: Figure 4-5. Upstream vegetation cro
- Page 125: level, whenever possible. Immature
- Page 129 and 130: Alafia River - Cross Section 64 - W
- Page 131 and 132: Delphi method lacks the rapid feedb
- Page 133 and 134: TOTAL DAYS OF INUNDATION DURING THE
- Page 135 and 136: Period of Record Median Daily Flows
- Page 137 and 138: Wetted Perimeter - USGS 84.5 - SWFW
- Page 139 and 140: Alafia River Station 91.5 Stage in
- Page 141 and 142: section sites and corresponding flo
- Page 143 and 144: 4.9.1.2 Recreational Use Assessment
- Page 145 and 146: Chapter 5 Results and Recommended M
- Page 147 and 148: greater than 25 cfs would inundate
- Page 149 and 150: For the USGS Lithia gage site, the
- Page 151 and 152: 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 T20 T21 T27 T3
- Page 153 and 154: Wetted Perimeter (linear feet) 2000
- Page 155 and 156: dominant vegetation zones, mucky so
- Page 157 and 158: 5.5.1 Application of PHABSIM for Bl
- Page 159 and 160: 5.5.3 Flow Relationships with Woody
- Page 161 and 162: River begins on October 28 and ends
- Page 163 and 164: Table 5-4. Maximum monthly percent-
- Page 165 and 166: 5.6.3 Short-Term Compliance Standar
- Page 167 and 168: Table 5-5. Maximum monthly percent-
- Page 169 and 170: 5.8 Short-Term Compliance Standard
- Page 171 and 172: Table 5-7. Proposed Minimum Flows f
- Page 173 and 174: Biological Services Program Report
- Page 175 and 176: Jones, G.W., and Upchurch, S.B., 19
modeling was used to characterize potential changes in the availability of fish<br />
habitat <strong>and</strong> macroinvertebrate diversity. Recent <strong>and</strong> Long-term Positional<br />
Hydrograph (RALPH) analysis was used to examine inundation durations for<br />
specific habitats or floodplain elevations <strong>and</strong> to also examine changes in<br />
inundation patterns that could be expected with changes to the flow regime.<br />
4.3.1 HEC-RAS Modeling<br />
The HEC-RAS model is a one-dimensional hydraulic model that can be used to<br />
analyze river flows. Version 3.1.1 of the HEC-RAS model was released by the<br />
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center in November 2002<br />
<strong>and</strong> supports water surface profile calculations for steady <strong>and</strong> unsteady flows,<br />
including subcritical, supercritical, or mixed flows. Profile computations begin at<br />
a cross-section with known or assumed starting condition <strong>and</strong> proceed upstream<br />
for subcritical flow or downstream for supercritical flow. The model solves the<br />
one-dimensional energy equation. Energy losses between two neighboring cross<br />
sections are computed by Manning's equation in the case of frictional losses <strong>and</strong><br />
derived from a coefficient multiplied by the change in velocity head for<br />
contraction/expansion losses. For areas where the water surface profile changes<br />
rapidly (e.g., hydraulic jump, bridges, river confluences), the momentum equation<br />
is used (US Army Corps of Engineers 2002).<br />
We used the HEC-RAS model <strong>and</strong> available flow records for the USGS Lithia<br />
gage to simulate flows at cross-section sites within the <strong>Alafia</strong> <strong>River</strong> corridor.<br />
Data required for performing HEC-RAS simulations included geometric data <strong>and</strong><br />
steady flow data. Geometric data consisted of connectivity data for the river<br />
system, cross-section elevation data, reach length, energy loss coefficients due<br />
to friction <strong>and</strong> channel contraction/expansion, stream junction information, <strong>and</strong><br />
hydraulic structure data, including information for bridges, culverts, etc. Required<br />
steady-flow data included the flow regime <strong>and</strong> boundary conditions.<br />
Calculations for subcritical flow begin downstream where a boundary condition is<br />
applied. For the <strong>Alafia</strong> <strong>River</strong> corridor, a known water-surface elevation,<br />
calculated from a stage-discharge relationship at the USGS Lithia gage, was<br />
used as a downstream boundary condition. The energy equation is then solved<br />
between the first <strong>and</strong> second (most downstream) cross sections. Once this is<br />
achieved, the model repeats this process working its way upstream balancing the<br />
energy equation (or momentum equation if appropriate) between adjacent cross<br />
sections until the most upstream cross section is reached.<br />
Model accuracy is evaluated by comparing calculated water-surface elevations at<br />
any gage locations with a stage-discharge relationship derived from historic data<br />
at that location. The model is calibrated by adjusting factors in the model until<br />
the calculated results closely approximate the observed relationship between<br />
stage <strong>and</strong> flow. While expansion <strong>and</strong> contraction coefficients can be altered, the<br />
4-10