Development of techniques to quantify effective impervious cover.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Development of techniques to quantify effective impervious cover.

Filetype[PDF-4.10 MB]


English

Details:

  • Creators:
  • Corporate Creators:
  • Corporate Contributors:
  • Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Publication/ Report Number:
  • Resource Type:
  • Geographical Coverage:
  • Corporate Publisher:
  • Abstract:
    Practitioners responsible for the design and implementation of stormwater management practices rely

    heavily on estimates of impervious area in a watershed. However, the most important parameter in determining

    actual urban runoff is the “effective” impervious area (EIA), or the portion of total impervious area that is directly

    connected to the storm sewer system. EIA, which is often considerably less than total impervious area and can vary

    with rainfall depth and intensity, is likely not determined with sufficient accuracy in current practice. A more

    accurate determination of EIA in a watershed would benefit a wide range of organizations involved in the design of

    stormwater management, pollution prevention, and transportation structures.

    This study investigated two existing methods of estimating EIA in a watershed: (1) analysis of large

    rainfall-runoff data sets using the method of Boyd et al. (1994), and (2) overlay analysis of spatial (GIS) data,

    including land cover, elevation, and stormwater infrastructure, using the method of Han and Burian (2009). The

    latter method provides an estimate of connected pavement, but requires the user to input the value of connected

    rooftop to determine the actual EIA value, which is the sum of these two quantities. The two methods were applied

    to two urban catchments within the Capitol Region Watershed in St. Paul, MN. The results were used to evaluate

    the potential of each method and make recommendations for future studies.

    In summary, the data analysis technique (Boyd et al., 1994) has the advantage of being quick and relatively

    simple to implement, as it did not require familiarity with specialized software tools (e.g. ArcGIS) and could be

    completed with any spreadsheet program with graphing capabilities (e.g. Excel). The EIA estimates from the data

    analysis are the most accurate, but the technique is unable to determine where in the watershed the EIA is located,

    and cannot be used if runoff discharge and local precipitation data is unavailable. By contrast, the GIS method

    (Han and Burian, 2009) has the advantage of being applicable to un-gauged watersheds, and also provides the

    location of EIA in the watershed. This latter feature makes it particularly attractive for honing the development and

    placement of BMP’s in a watershed. Unfortunately, the accuracy of the GIS method is completely dependent on the

    ability to faithfully represent the amount of roof connection in a watershed, a process that can add significant time

    and expense to the EIA estimate.

  • Format:
  • Funding:
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov