Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · sir20075032

LiDAR-Derived Flood-Inundation Maps for Real-Time Flood-Mapping Applications, Tar River Basin, North Carolina

Abstract

Flood-inundation maps were created for selected streamgage sites in the North Carolina Tar River basin. Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data with a vertical accuracy of about 20 centimeters, provided by the Floodplain Mapping Information System of the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program, were processed to produce topographic data for the inundation maps. Bare-earth mass point LiDAR data were reprocessed into a digital elevation model with regularly spaced 1.5-meter by 1.5-meter cells. A tool was developed as part of this project to connect flow paths, or streams, that were inappropriately disconnected in the digital elevation model by such features as a bridge or road crossing. The Hydraulic Engineering Center-River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) model, developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, was used for hydraulic modeling at each of the study sites. Eleven individual hydraulic models were developed for the Tar River basin sites. Seven models were developed for reaches with a single gage, and four models were developed for reaches of the Tar River main stem that receive flow from major gaged tributaries, or reaches in which multiple gages were near one another. Combined, the Tar River hydraulic models included 272 kilometers of streams in the basin, including about 162 kilometers on the Tar River main stem. The hydraulic models were calibrated to the most current stage-discharge relations at 11 long-term streamgages where rating curves were available. Medium- to high-flow discharge measurements were made at some of the sites without rating curves, and high-water marks from Hurricanes Fran and Floyd were available for high-stage calibration. Simulated rating curves matched measured curves over the full range of flows. Differences between measured and simulated water levels for a specified flow were no more than 0.44 meter and typically were less. The calibrated models were used to generate a set of water-surface profiles for each of the 11 modeled reaches at 0.305-meter increments for water levels ranging from bankfull to approximately the highest recorded water level at the downstream-most gage in each modeled reach. Inundated areas were identified by subtracting the water-surface elevation in each 1.5-meter by 1.5-meter grid cell from the land-surface elevation in the cell through an automated routine that was developed to identify all inundated cells hydraulically connected to the cell at the downstream-most gage in the model domain. Inundation maps showing transportation networks and orthoimagery were prepared for display on the Internet. These maps also are linked to the U.S. Geological Survey North Carolina Water Science Center real-time streamflow website. Hence, a user can determine the near real-time stage and water-surface elevation at a U.S. Geological Survey streamgage site in the Tar River basin and link directly to the flood-inundation maps for a depiction of the estimated inundated area at the current water level. Although the flood-inundation maps represent distinct boundaries of inundated areas, some uncertainties are associated with these maps. These are uncertainties in the topographic data for the hydraulic model computational grid and inundation maps, effective friction values (Manning's n), model-validation data, and forecast hydrographs, if used. The Tar River flood-inundation maps were developed by using a steady-flow hydraulic model. This assumption clearly has less of an effect on inundation maps produced for low flows than for high flows when it typically takes more time to inundate areas. A flood in which water levels peak and fall slowly most likely will result in more inundation than a similar flood in which water levels peak and fall quickly. Limitations associated with the steady-flow assumption for hydraulic modeling vary from site to site. The one-dimensional modeling approach used in this study resulted in good agreement between measurements and simulations. T

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35.05698043137265° to 36.4477991295848° latitude; -78.5028076171875° to -75.234375° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jerad D. Bales, Chad R. Wagner, Kirsten C. Tighe, Silvia Terziotti. 2007. LiDAR-Derived Flood-Inundation Maps for Real-Time Flood-Mapping Applications, Tar River Basin, North Carolina. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20075032

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗