EPA-600/2-77-199
September 1977
Environmental Protection Technology Series
SAMPLING AND MODELING
OF NON-POINT SOURCES
AT A COAL-FIRED UTILITY
W
UJ
O
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad categories were
established to facilitate further development and application of environmental tech-
nology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously planned to foster technology
transfer and a maximum interface in related fields. The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY
series. This series describes research performed to develop and demonstrate instrumen-
tation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent environmental degradation from
point and non-point sources of pollution. This work provides the new or Improved tech-
nology required for the control and treatment of pollution sources to meet environmental
quality standards.
REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved for
publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-77-199
September 1977
SAMPLING AND MODELING
OF NON-POINT SOURCES
AT A COAL-FIRED UTILITY
by
Gordon T. Brookman
James J. Binder
Willard A. Wade III
TRC - The Research Corporation of New England
125 Silas Deane Highway
Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109
Contract No. 68-02-2133
Task No. 2
Program Element No. INE624
EPA Project Officer: D. Bruce Harris
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6
2.1 Conclusions 6
2.2 Recommendations 9
3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 11
3.1 Background Review of Non-Point Source Water
Pollution 11
3.1.1 Evaluation of Industrial Non-Point '
Sources 15
3.1.2 Measurement Methodology
3.1.2.1 Selection of Sample Type and
Sampling Method 19
3.1.2.2 Sampling Receiving Waters 21
3.1.2.3 Sampling Runoff 22
3.1.3 Prediction Methodology 23
3.1.4 Background Review Conclusions 33
3.2 Field Survey 34
3.2.1 Industry Selection 34
3.2.2 Site Selection 35
3.2.3 Test Plan 39
3.2.4 Implementation 41
3.2.4.1 Warren Station 41
3.2.4.2 Portland Station 43
3.2.4.3 Analytical Procedures 45
3.2.4.4 Quality Control of Analytical Work ... 48
3.2.5 Results of Field Survey 51
3,2.5.1 Warren Station Data 52
3.2.5.2 Portland Station Data 62
3.3 Model Development 71
3.3.1 Model Selection . . 72
3.3.2 Detailed Model Description of
SSWMM - RECEIV II 73
3.3.2.1 SSWMM (Short Stormwater Management
Model Program) 74
3.3.2.2 LNKPRG (Link Program) 86
3.3.2.3 SETUP/QUANTITY (RECEIV II
Quantity Program) 87
3.3.2.4 QUALITY (RECEIV II Quality Program) . . 91
3.3.3 Model Application . 94
3.3.3.1 Fundamental Model Inputs 96
3,3.3.2 Model Results Ill
3.3.4 Results of the Model Development
Program 125
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Section Page
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF FIELD DATA
B SSWMM - RECEIV II PROGRAM LISTING
C SSWMM - RECEIV II INPUT REQUIREMENTS
D SSWMM - RECEIV II INPUT LISTINGS FOR
MODEL RUNS 1, 2, 3, AND 4
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Simple Representation of the Runoff Cycle .... 3
3-1 Non-point sources 12
3-2 Plug Collector 24
3-3 Relative Difficulty of Applied Modeling ...... 26
3-4 Site Layout with Sampling Locations - Site #1 . . 37
3-5 Site Layout with Sampling Locations - Site #2 . . 37
3-6 SSWMM - RECEIV II Flowchart 75
3-7 Discrete Element Schematic of Land Area;
Warren, PA 97
3-8 Discrete Element Schematic of Allegheny River;
Warren, PA 98
3-9 Discrete Element Schematic of Land Area;
Portland, PA 103
3-10 Discrete Element Schematic of Delaware River;
Portland, PA 104
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3-1 Non-point Source Problems Listed in
State 305(b) Reports 13
3-2 Industries Whose Proposed or Final Effluent
Guidelines Reference Non-point Sources 16
i i
3-3 Comparison of Types of Samples and Means
of Sampling 20
3-4 Models Selected for Evaluation 29
3-5 A Comparison of Model Capabilities, Application,
Complexity, Cost, and Availability , 31
3-6 Characteristics of the Two Sampling Sites
Used in the Survey 36
3-7 Preservation and Analytical Methods Used for
Sample Analyses 46
3-8 Range of Pollutant Concentration at the Sampling
Locations at Warren Station of Pennsylvania
Electric Co., Warren, PA 53
3-9 Mean Pollutant Concentrations with 95% Confidence
Limits in the Allegheny River at Warren Station
of Pennsylvania Electric Co., Warren PA .... 55
3-10 Comparisons of Mean Values & Variances Within 95%
Confidence Limits at Upstream & Downstream Sites
During Dry & Wet Sampling Periods;
Warren, PA 56
3-11 Characteristics of Coal Pile Leachate-Dry
Weather at Warren Station of Pennsylvania Electric
Co., Warren, PA 58
3-12 Characteristics of Rainfall Events at Warren
Station of Pennsylvania Electric Co.,
Warren, PA 59
3-13 Characteristics of Coal Pile & Access Road
Runoff During Second Storm Event at Warren Station
of Pennsylvania Electric Co., Warren, PA .... 60
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES (CONT.)
Table
3-14 Range of Pollutant Concentration at the
Sampling Locations at Portland Station of
Metropolitan Edison Co., Portland, PA 63
3-15 Mean Concentrations with 95% Confidence Limits
for Selected Pollutants at the Portland Station
of Metropolitan Edison Co., Portland, PA .... 65
3-17 Characteristics of the Rainfall Event at
Portland Station of Metropolitan Edison Co.,
Portland, PA 68
3-18 Characteristics of Coal Pile & Fly Ash Area
Runoff During the Rainfall Event at Portland
Station of Metropolitan Edison Co.,
Portland, PA . . . 69
3-19 SSWMM Printout 84
3-20 SSWMM Output File 85
3-21 Discrete Land Elements; Warren, PA 99
3-22 Discrete River Elements; Warren, PA 100
3-23 Discrete Land Elements; Portland, PA 105
3-24 Discrete River Elements; Portland, PA 106
3-25 Summary Results of Dust and Dirt Sampling Program
as Input to Model 108
3-26 Summary of Storm Activity 110
3-27 Comparison of Model Results to Field Data Model
Run 1, Storm 2, (Initial Run) Warren
Generating Station 113
3-28 Comparison of Model Results to Field Data Model
Run 1, Storm 2 (Calibration Run) Warren
Generating Station 114
3-29 Comparison of Model Results to Field Data Model
Run 3, Storm 1, (Verification) Warren
Generating Station 116
vii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (CONT.)
Table Page
3-30 Comparison of Model Results to Field Data
Model Run 4, Storm 1, Portland
Generating Station 117
3-31 Comparison of Model Results to Field Data
Model Run 4, Storm 1, Portland
Generating Station 118
3-32 Selected Results From Model Runs Run 1, Storm 2
(Initial Run) Warren Generating Station . , . . . 119
3-33 Selected Results From Model Runs Run 2, Storm 2
(Calibration Run) Warren Generating Station . . . 120
3-34 Selected Results From Model Runs Run 3, Storm I
(Calibration) Warren Generating Station 121
3-35 Selected Results From Model Runs Run 4, Storm 1
Portland Generating Station 122
viii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Since the enactment of PL 92-500 (Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972), the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has directed
its water pollution control program primarily at point source emissions
which include wastewater discharges through pipes to receiving bodies of
water. Most industries and many municipalities will meet the 1977
standards. However, there are numerous areas in the United States where
water quality has not significantly improved even though point sources
have been controlled. In such areas non-point source water pollution
often has a major influence on water quality. This is documented by the
National Commission on Water Quality which reported that "non-point
pollutant sources are significant to the Commission's study because they
may in some instances overwhelm and negate the reductions achieved through
point source effluent limitations".'1' Based on these findings, the
Commission recommended to Congress that "control or treatment measures
shall be applied to agricultural and non-point discharges when these
measures are cost effective and will significantly help in achieving water
quality standards".(2)
Non-point sources are not specifically defined in PL 92-500. For
this program the following definition applies:
the accumulated pollutants in a receiving body of water
from runoff due to snow melt and rain, seepage and percolation,
and chemical spills and leaks, contributing to the degradation
of the quality of surface waters and groundwaters.
-1-
-------
As defined, non-point sources have some or all of the following char-
acteristics:
Diffuse in nature
Intermittent
• Site specific
• Not easily monitored at their exact source
Related to uncontrollable meteorological events
(precipitation, snow melt, drought)
Not usually repetitive in nature from event to event
The primary transport mechanism for non-point sources is water runoff
from meteorological events. Figure l-l'3' is a simple representation of
the runoff cycle. This figure shows three basic modes of runoff transport:
overland flow, interflow, and groundwater flow. The quickest means of trans-
port is direct overland flow, commonly called surface runoff. Surface run-
off will usually contain the highest quantity of contaminants and, except
during snow melt conditions, does not usually flow for a long duration after
a storm event.
The second means of transport is infiltration (seepage) into the soil
and then transport by interflow (also called interstitial flow) through the
ground to either a receiving body of water or, depending on terrain, perco-
lation back to the surface to become surface runoff. Interflow contaminants
are often filtered by the soil. The interflow route is between the surface
and the water table and, depending on the soil and geological conditions, can
be rapid.
-2-
-------
Surface detention = sheet of water
Depression
storage
Perched
water table
Soil moisture ..-..'•• •;.'•
Surface runoff
Impervious lens Groundwater
flow
----- _ -_-.-_-_-- -_-.-_-. Water table ------------ -r.^^r^--
Stream
channel
Figure 1-1: Simple Representation of the Runoff Cycle
—3—
-------
The third transport route, by far the slowest, is infiltration (seepage)
to the water table followed by groundwater flow to a receiving body of
water. While the soil may filter contaminants, any pollutants which enter
the groundwaters could persist for years.
The scope of this program is directed toward surface runoff for the
following reasons:
';
1. Surface runoff is the quickest means for transporting
pollutants to receiving waters and usually contains
the highest quantities of contaminants and flow.
2. Depending on terrain, measurement of surface runoff
will also include quantities of interflow (inter-
stitial flow).
3. While sampling non-point sources is difficult, surface
runoff presents the easiest means for tracking and
measuring these sources.
In January, 1976, an evaluation of the scope of the waterborne fugitive
emissions (non-point sources) problem was initiated. The objectives of
the initial program were:
To develop a matrix relating sources of industrial non-
point pollution to categories of pollutants.
To evaluate present sampling techniques used in non-
point programs based on practicality and efficiency,
and to propose a Level 1 (overall identification)
sampling program for industrial activities.
To evaluate existing mathematical models for predict-
ing non-point source pollution based on their suit-
ability, adaptability, complexity, cost, and availability
for quantifying runoff and predicting its associated
impact on receiving waters.
-4-
-------
This work was completed in June 1976 and Is summarized in Section
3.1 of this report. Based on the results of this initial program, a
follow-on program was initiated with the following objectives:
• Design a test program for sampling runoff and receiving
waters for an industrial site.
• Using the test plan, quantify and qualify runoff from two
coal burning utilities and measure the effect, if any, on
the receiving body.
• Choose one of the models evaluated in the previous work
and adapt it for use in the coal burning utility industry.
• Calibrate and verify the model using the field data.
Section 3.2 describes the field survey and results. The model
description, development, and results are detailed in Section 3.3.
Conclusions and recommendations for further work are summarized in Sec-
tion 2.0.
This report is part of a two-volume set. The other volume entitled
"Technical Manual for the Measurement and Modeling of Non-Point Sources
at an Industrial Site on a River" provides a general guide for performing
a program such as the one described in this volume.
-5-
-------
2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Conclusions
This program began with a background review of non-point source water
pollution from industries. Included in the review was an evaluation of
measurement methodology and prediction methodology which could be utilized
in an assessment of non-point sources from an industrial site.
Based on this initial review, the following conclusions were reached:
1. Only urban and agricultural non-point sources have been
quantified to any extent, while little has been done
toward isolating and quantifying non-point sources from
industrial activities.
2. Non-point sources most probable to industrial sites are:
a) Runoff from material storage piles
b) Runoff from accumulated materials due to fallout
from fugitive and point source air emissions.
3. Non-point sampling programs have generally included only
measurements of the quality of the receiving waters.
Little has been done with sampling actual runoff except
in urban storm sewers and agricultural ditches.
4. With the exception of agricultural and mining activities,
mathematical models have not been developed to simulate
stormwater runoff and receiving water impact specific to
industries.
5. Five of ten models evaluated are capable of dynamically
simulating the quantity and quality of both stormwater
runoff and its impact on the receiving waters.
6. All of the five models referred to in item 5 can be
adapted for industrial non-point sources; of these, how-
ever, three are proprietary, and only one is completely
in the public domain. The other model is part proprietary
and part in the public domain.
-6-
-------
Using these conclusions, a field survey for sampling stormwater run-
off and receiving waters at industrial sites was designed and performed.
The sites chosen were located at two coal-fired utility plants in Pennsylvania.
One plant was near the headwaters of the Allegheny River in Warren, Pennsyl-
vania. The second plant was on the Delaware River in Portland, Pennsylvania,
near the Pocono Mountains. In addition, one of the models evaluated in
the background review was adapted for use in the coal burning utility industry.
The following conclusions resulted from the field survey and mathemat-
cial model development in this program:
1. The pollutant concentrations in the river at both sites
were highly variable, often by an order of magnitude.
These variations were independent of river flow and
weather conditions.
2. The mass loading of pollutants in the Delaware River
increased substantially during and after the sampled
storm event. This was due primarily to an increased
flow attributable to upstream conditions and storm in-
tensity. The mass loading of pollutants in the Allegheny
River remained essentially unchanged for both sampled
storm events since river flow was controlled by a dam
approximately six miles upstream and neither storm
event was substantial. Therefore, the pollutant concen-
trations in each river at both upstream and downstream
sampling stations were not necessarily higher during
storm conditions.
3. The data from these two sites generally show no statis-
tical difference in mean concentrations of upstream versus
downstream pollutant levels in either dry or wet conditions.
4. The data show no statistical difference in sample variances
which are not consistently predictable with respect to
pollutant, site, and sampling period.
-7-
-------
5, The main contributors to the change in S2 of the calcu-
lated variance were site location and the storm event.
The site location was the major contributor at Warren
while the rain event was the major contributor at Port-
land. The sample variances were generally consistent
for each pollutant at the Warren and Portland Sites.
The only exceptions were total suspended solids and
iron.
6. The storm data from Warren shows a "first flush" effect
from the initial runoff of the access road which con-
tained fugitive fallout from the coal pile and coal
trucks.
7. The pollutant concentrations of the leachates from the
coal pile at Warren were orders of magnitude higher than
the storm runoff pollutant concentrations. For a short
duration moderate intensity storm and a moderate dura-
tion low intensity storm (the two events sampled at
Warren), the leachate mass loading was greater than the
storm mass loading because the leachate drained for
several days. Thus, for the two storms sampled at
Warren, the pollutant loads on the river from the power
plant were less during rain than during the dry weather
period following the rain with the exception of total
suspended solids.
8. The sample plugs worked effectively except for one prob-
lem; dry solids filtered through the screen prior to
runoff and leached into the sample, creating higher mea-
sured pollutant concentrations.
9. The field survey results from the two utility sites in-
dicate that more field survey work must be performed at
industrial sites before control measures can be taken.
10. The SSWMM - RECEIV II model is capable of predicting the
quantity and quality of stormwater runoff and its impact
on receiving waters for specific industries with model
limitations. These limitations include the lack of capa-
bility to simulate storm erosion of infinite sources,
i.e., material storage piles, and to simulate stormwater
percolation through material storage piles.
11. Application of the model to the utility industry has
demonstrated that for the most part, where adequate field
data were available, the model results compared favorably
to field measurements.
-8-
-------
12. At Warren, calibrated model results for stormwater run-
off flow and pollutant concentrations (total suspended
solids, total iron, manganese, and aluminum) compared
within a factor of four to field measurements, and river
pollutant concentrations for all six pollutants compared
within a factor of three. EPA has indicated that an agree-
ment within a factor of four to five should be considered
indicative of a good predictive method. A model-field
measurement comparative factor of four was maintained for
a second storm at Warren indicating that the calibrated
model could predict the effects of different storm condi-
tions with the same degree of accuracy established in
model calibration.
13. Due to a lack of runoff flow data at the Portland site, it
was not possible to ascertain the comparative validity of
the model at more than one site.
2.2 Recommendations
Based on the conclusions of this program, the following recommenda-
tions are made for future work:
1. Develop the SSWMM - RECEIV II model capability to simulate
the erosion of material storage piles, and to simulate the
percolation of stormwater runoff through materials storage
piles.
2. Conduct additional field surveys to provide data to com-
pare to model predictions, thus enhancing model credibility.
Specifically, more field data are required on:
a) Stormwater runoff flow and pollutant concentrations
from industrial sites.
b) Dust and dirt accumulation rates and the amount of
pollutants in the dust and dirt.
c) Flow and pollutant concentrations after the storm for
the leachate from material storage piles.
d) Receiving water pollutant concentrations. To acquire
definitive representative receiving water pollutant
concentrations (background and storm-induced), it
will be necessary to increase the number of sampling
stations in the receiving water upstream and downstream
-9-
-------
from the stormwater discharges. At least two, and
preferably three, such stations should be established
at both the upstream and downstream sites. With a
single upstream station, the risk is greater of
measuring an anomaly in the river characteristics.
The additional upstream stations would be located
either in an "across the flow" pattern or longitu-
dinally with flow depending on river mixing charac-
teristics to insure that the sampling locations and
data are representative of the river. The additional
downstream stations would be located longitudinally
in the river to allow for better definition of the
impact of stormwater runoff on the river (i.e., dilu-
tion and reaction of non-point pollutants in the
river).
3. Once model credibility has been enhanced, apply the model
to a site on an estuary or lake and compare the results
with those of a field sampling program.
4. Upon completion of items 1, 2, and 3 prepare a User's
Manual for SSWMM - RECEIV II to enhance the model's use.
-10-
-------
3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This project consisted of three major tasks. The background review,
the initial task, included an evaluation of potential non-point sources
from industry, a review of sampling techniques to quantify non-point
sources, and an evaluation of existing mathematical models for predicting
the impact of non-point sources from industrial sites. The second task
involved a field survey to quantify non-point sources at two coal-fired
utility plants in Pennsylvania. The final task was the adaptation of a
mathematical model to predict stormwater runoff from a coal-fired utility-
3.1 Background Review of Non-Point Source Water Pollution
A non-point source was defined in Section 1.0 and the primary means
of transport (runoff, interflow, and groundwater flow) were discussed.
CO
Figure 3-1 illustrates the most common non-point sources and Table 3-1
demonstrates that most of these sources are rated as Areas of Concern by
(5)
the states in their 305(b) reports (PL 92-500) to EPA. The following
summarizes some of these common non-point sources:
Urban Sources - Rainfall dislodges pollutants from street surfaces,
rooftops, lawns and other urban environments, causing contaminant particles
to become suspended and dissolved in the runoff. Pollution concentration
is therefore greatest at the beginning of a rainfall event. This phenomenon
is commonly called "first flush".
The most common pollutants in urban runoff are dust, pathogens,
fertilizers, pesticides, battery acid, rubber, grease, oil, animal and
-11-
-------
Dry fallout
to
I
Residential
Commercial
Sanitary landfills
Septic tanks
Precipitation
Woodlands
(silviculture)
Construction
Unregistered
point sources
Hydrologic ^,
modifications '4=
il.— -s^
>J
Wetlands v
Groves and orchards
Agricultural
Salt water
intrusion
v/ *'^= - V— "
Figure 3-1: Non-point sources
-------
TABLE 3-1
NON-POINT SOURCE PROBLEMS LISTED IN STATE 305(b) REPORTS
Alabama
Alaska *
American Samoa
Arizonat
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Territory of Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louis iana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts*
Michigant
Minnesota
Mississippi*
Missouri *
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
Non-Point Source Problems
Agricultural
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X 1
X
X
X
X
New York X
North Carolina
North Dakotat
Ohio
X
X
Oklahoma j X
Oregont
Pennsylvania j X
Commonwealth of Puerto X
Rico •
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas i
Trust Territories
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Virgin Islands
Washington
West Virginia
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
~x
X
Wisconsin ] X
Wyoming
Totals
X
44
Sivicultural
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
— Y~
X
X
X
X
X
X i
X
X
X
"x" ~*
X
x ~f
21
00
c
•H
a
•rl
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X .
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
27
Construction
Hydrologic
Modification
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X i X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x i -
i
X
X ; X
X
X ;
X j
X
X
X ''
X
_x
_.?_.!.
25
9
§
XI
M
i=>
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
" x
X j
Salt Water
Intrusion
X
X
Proposed
Energy
Development
X
X X j
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4
. ....
X
X X
r
A
X
X
- x- -1
X
X
40
v -
i
i ' x
4 3
*State report was not received in time for inclusion.
tNot discussed by category
-13-
-------
bird droppings, heavy metals, salts, sand, gravel, coal, leaves, paper
products, plastics, and glassware.
Agriculture - Runoff from cultivated crop fields, forage crop
fields, orchards, vineyards, rangeland, pasture land, confined animal
feedlots, and aquaculture project areas producing algae, shellfish, and
finfish are sources of non-point pollution. When forests or grass lands
are cultivated, erosion is increased.
Crop fertilization provides nutrients, principally phosphates and
nitrates, which are transported into lakes and streams, thereby accel-
erating eutrophication. Irrigation can leach salts out of the soil,
and pesticides used for control can be transported to receiving waters.
Runoff from rangelands, pasture lands, and feedlots (for beef, dairy,
pork, and poultry) carries significant amounts of suspended solids, nu-
trients, coliform bacteria, organic materials, and salts.
Silviculture - This activity which includes the harvesting of trees,
log transport, and forest regeneration has several potential non-point
sources. Removing the forest canopy along shallow stream banks and
lakes causes water temperature to rise and thus affects the biota. The
harvesting of timber increases surface runoff, which transports suspended
and dissolved solids and organic materials to surface waters. Log trans-
porting activities cause increases in runoff containing sediment. Fer-
tilization and pest control cause nutrients and pesticides to be
transported to streams.
Recreation Areas and Wetlands - These areas comprise non-point
sources which are a combination of those listed under agricultural and
-14-
-------
silvicultural activities. Sediment (suspended and dissolved solids),
organic materials and nutrients (compounds of nitrogen and phosphorous)
are the primary contaminants.
Hydrologic Modifications - These non-point sources are related to
dam construction, dredging, and other channel activities. The major con-
taminant is usually sediment.
Salt Water Intrusion - Salt or saline water seeps into fresh water
aquifers (groundwater) thus contaminating fresh water supplies. In-
trusion results from encroachment of seawater into coastal areas, from
man-made saline wastes such as road salts or deepwell injection, and from
return flows to streams from irrigated lands.
The objectives of this program are concerned with non-point sources
from industry. Subsections 3.1.1 through 3.1.3 describe in detail potential
non-point sources for industry, measurement methodology applied to indus-
trial non-point sources, and the mathematical modeling of such sources.
3.1.1 Evaluation of Industrial Non-Point Sources
Little data is available for quantifying and qualifying non-point
sources from industrial sites. Twelve industrial categories listed in
Table 3-2 have Effluent Guidelines and Standards (proposed or final)
which mention, define, and/or limit non-point sources of pollution in
various sub-categories. Each of the industries was assessed for types
of non-point sources and categories of pollutants. Generally, the
sources with the highest potential for non-point pollution in these
-15-
-------
TABLE 3-2
INDUSTRIES WHOSE PROPOSED OR FINAL
EFFLUENT GUIDELINES REFERENCE NON-POINT SOURCES
Cement Manufacturing
Inorganic Chemicals
Fertilizer Manufacturing
Petroleum Refining
Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Nonferrous Metals
Phosphate Manufacturing
Steam Electric Power Generating
Timber Products
Coal Mining
Mineral Mining
Ore Mining and Dressing
-16-
-------
industries are runoff from material storage piles and runoff from ac-
cumulated materials due to fallout from fugitive and point source air
emissions. The categories of pollutants associated with these sources
are:
Sediment (suspended and dissolved solids)
Organic Materials (materials which cause an oxygen demand
either biochemical or chemical)
• Metals (lead, zinc, mercury, iron, copper, cadmium, etc.)
Nutrients (compounds of nitrogen and phosphorous)
Sulfates
The primary effluent limitations for industrial non-point sources
are for sediment (suspended and dissolved solids). All industries listed
in Table 3-2 will have a total suspended solids (TSS) limitation. The
limitations which are already promulgated, such as those for the Steam Electric
Power Generating Industry have a TSS range of 20-50 mg/1 maximum daily
concentration and 10-25 mg/1 average monthly concentration.
While only specified industries must comply with emission regulations
concerning non-point sources, all industries must meet water quality stan-
dards if they discharge to a receiving water body. If water quality stan-
dards are being violated, industry may have to quantify its non-point
sources and determine the impact on the receiving water body to determine
if these sources need to be controlled.
-17-
-------
3.1.2 Measurement Methodology
One of the initial objectives of the program was to evaluate the
practicality and efficiency of present sampling techniques used in non-
point programs and to propose an overall identification sampling program
for industrial activities.
A measurement program designed to quantify non-point source pollution
from industrial activities should include runoff sampling (generally of
contaminated stormwater) and receiving water sampling. Runoff sampling is
used as a means of isolating the particular sources, while receiving water
sampling is used to determine the impact of the runoff on the quality of
the receiving water. This impact on water quality is important since non-
point pollution is site specific and there are locations where an industry
may be meeting the emission limitation for non-point sources and yet may
have to improve control because of water quality limitations. The infor-
mation from such a survey can ultimately be used to determine whether the
facility should be controlled, and, if it can be controlled, how much con-
trol is necessary.
Since runoff is site specific, background information such as topog-
raphy, geology, hydrology, climatology, and area land use must be obtained
in order to design the field survey. In addition, industry operating pro-
cedures should be obtained in an industrial program.
The evaluation of sampling techniques to be used in a field survey
included a literature review. In general, industrial runoff has not been
separated from urban runoff and very little data exists for industrial
sources such as material storage piles. There is a great deal of informa-
tion on sampling receiving water bodies and runoff with specific reference
-18-
-------
to urban runoff (storm sewers) and combined sewer overf lows. (6)(7)(8)
The next three subsections describe the types of samples required and some
means available for sampling, as well as an approach to sampling both re-
ceiving waters and runoff.
To provide a representative evaluation of the characteristics of run-
off and its effect on the receiving body, a number of storm events should
be studied. Storms of different intensities and durations, with different
intervening intervals of dry weather should be sampled. Generally, storms
of high intensity are of short duration (e.g., thunderstorms) and are more
important than storms of low intensity and long duration because the greater
the intensity of the storm, the greater the quantity of materials that will
be scoured from the land surface.
3.1.2.1 Selection of Sample Type and Sampling Method
There are two basic types of samples which should be used in a field
program for quantification of non-point sources: discrete and composite.
A composite sample is a series of discrete (individual samples). Discrete
samples are best used for definition of a single storm event while com-
posite samples are used for long-term or average storm conditions. These
samples can be collected either manually or by automatic samplers. Table
3-3 compares discrete and composite samples as they relate to a runoff
field survey and also compares manual versus automatic sampling.
There are several drawbacks to manual sampling. First, a manual sam-
pling program requires the use of trained personnel. This was verified
by Shelley^9) who reported that a significant difference in sample analy-
ses resulted between samples collected by trained and untrained personnel.
-19-
-------
TABLE 3-3
COMPARISON OF TYPES OF SAMPLES AND MEANS OF SAMPLING
Comparison of Discrete and Composite Samples
Discrete
Composite
1. Produces a large number of samples.
2. Allows comparison of runoff qual-
ities over a period of time..
3. Best used in definition of a
single storm event.
1. Produces a small number of samples.
2. Gives an integrated or total picture
of runoff qualities instead of iso-
lated qualities at different times.
3. Best used for long term, multiple
storm definition or average storm
definition.
Comparison of Manual and Automatic Sampling
Manual
Automatic
1.
2.
3.
4.
Manpower requirement is quite
large.
Sample collection equipment
expenditures are not excessive.
Simple submersible pumps and/or
weighted water samples suffice.
Field measurements can be made by
individual or combined meters.
The beginning of the storm event
can be missed if mobilization of
manpower is not immediate.
Samples will be unrepresentative
if untrained collectors are used.
If samples need to be collected
at close time intervals, extensive
manpower may be required at each
station or the intervals may be
missed altogether.
1. Manpower requirement is minimal;
only maintenance and removal of
samples require manpower.
2. Sample collection equipment be
comes a capital expenditure because
it is automated and must be sheltered
from weather and vandalism and often
must be specially designed.
3. Field measurements can be made by
meters used in conjunction with the
automatic collection system, or the
meters may be designed into the sys-
tem.
4. Since automatic collectors can be
activated by the beginning of pre-
cipitation or an increase in flow of
water level, the beginning influence
of the storm will not be missed.
5. Samples will be lost or nonrepresen-
tative only if equipment malfunctions
or power source is interrupted or
depleted.
6. Automatic samplers make collection
easier at close time intervals.
-20-
-------
Second, the "first flush" effect of storms cannot be effectively sampled
because of the problems associated with mobilization of manpower. Finally,
manual sampling of a storm event may be physically dangerous to personnel if
the increase in water level and/or flow is greater than anticipated.
3.1.2.2 Sampling Receiving Waters
Sampling of receiving waters, i.e., streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries,
can be performed either manually or automatically. The economics and the
required accuracy will dictate the sampling approach.
The concentration of a particular pollutant in the receiving water de-
pends on the natural background quality of the receiving water, the upstream
flow conditions, and the characteristics of both the test site itself and the
drainage areas adjoining the test site (e.g., size of areas, potential mate-
rials which can be transported to the receiving water by runoff). Thus,
sampling should be conducted in both dry and wet weather conditions both up-
stream and downstream of the source on a river. The dry weather water quali-
ty data will provide a basis for comparison when reviewing the wet weather
information. At least one upstream station should be established because
upstream inputs may change as a result of wet weather or as a result of
changes in plant operating procedures of upstream industries. The number and
location of downstream stations should be determined from a review of the
available maps and plant operating information. Any significant intercepting
water bodies should be noted and sampled for their contributions to the
water quality of the main stream. Each of these sampling locations should be
selected based on the drainage patterns of the test area. The development of
-21-
-------
drainage basins and selection of the sampling locations is detailed in the
second volume of this program entitled "Technical Manual for the Measurement
and Modeling of Non-Point Sources at an Industrial Site on a River".
If the receiving water is an estuary or lake, the sampling stations
should be located using one of the following procedures: review of his-
torical current data; a preliminary survey using parameters such as tur-
bidity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen and temperature; or a mixing study
using dye as a tracer.
If the receiving body is relatively wide and deep and not well mixed,
a number of sampling stations should be located across the water body and
at several depths. Curves and abutments in the receiving body should be
avoided when sampling because they alter flow patterns.
3.1.2.3 Sampling Runoff
A literature review provided a significant amount of information re-
lative to the measurement of urban runoff, predominantly in storm sewers.
As disclosed in the search, the only work specifically performed on non-
point sources from industrial activities involved the use of irrigation
ditches to sample agricultural runoff. At the time of this review, there
were no well-documented sampling procedures for overland runoff from in-
dustrial sources such as material storage pile drainage or runoff of
materials deposited on the ground from fallout of fugitive and point source
air emissions.
Leachate tests can be helpful in isolating the contaminants in the
runoff from storage piles, since such tests would relate the pile aging
process to runoff pollutant concentrations. These data, however, cannot
-22-
-------
be correlated directly with actual rainfall data, the quantity of runoff,
and the behavior of the transport of runoff to the receiving water. While
leachate tests may be applicable to material storage pile investigations,
they are not applicable in estimating the accumulated effects of the
materials on land, such as the area affected by an industrial facility.
A proposed method for measuring the quality of overland storm water
runoff involves the collection of samples using a plug collector shown in
(10)
Figure 3-2. These plugs are driven into the ground at selected loca-
tions where runoff will occur, such as at the base of material storage
piles and in natural gullies and channels. During a storm, the plugs are
changed at regular intervals depending on the intensity of the storm. The
volume of samples collected in several plugs in one area is composited and
analyzed.
To obtain mass loadings of overland runoff, a gross estimate of storm-
water runoff flow must be made. The test area is divided into drainage
basins, based either on topographic plots or visual observations. The flow
is estimated based on the total rainfall for the storm duration, the area of
each basin over which runoff flows, and the soil permeability in the drainage
basin.
3.1.3 Prediction Methodology
A field survey which includes both runoff and receiving water sampling
is costly. Since runoff is site specific and non-repetitive, it is con-
ceivable that the survey would have to be carried out during several
storms at several sites to establish meaningful data for any particular
-23-
-------
Plug collector
///XX//V^
4W
/// ^'//$v%
^Jl
^
«^
Figure 3-2: Plug Collector
-24-
-------
industry. Since this is impractical from cost and time standpoints, the
use of mathematical models for the prediction of non-point source pollution
could well be more efficient. Mathematical models properly applied provide
a cost-effective means of quantifying impacts on water quality resulting
from stormwater runoff. They are also effective in evaluating alternatives
for the control of non-point sources.
A literature review produced information on many mathematical models
developed in recent years to simulate the quantity and quality of stormwater
runoff and the impact of such runoff on the quality of natural water bodies.
Each model, however, was developed to satisfy a different need ranging from
the design of municipal storm sewer systems to the assessment of land use
as it influences flooding and water quality. A model developed specifically
for industrial runoff (except mining and agriculture) does not exist, al-
though some models can be adapted to such use.
Most of the models were developed for land areas typical of either
urban or agricultural environments. Therefore, the models must be adapted
to the land use of the particular industry of interest. All models still
require some field data for adaptation to a particular site.
There are many criteria that can be used when selecting a model.
In general, the simplest model which satisfies the project needs should be
selected for use since such a model is normally the most economic choice.
Figure 3-3(^ illustrates one aspect which contributes to model complexity—
the choice of parameters to be modeled. For instance, it is relatively
more difficult to model toxicity relationships than to model dissolved
oxygen levels.
-25-
-------
'oxicity Relationships \ VJ,,
Algal Growth: Metal Transport
Nutrient and Pesticide Transport
Indicator
Bacteria
Sediment
Transport
Dissolved Oxygen : Temperature : Dissolved Solids
Figure 3-3: Relative Difficulty of Applied Modeling
-26-
-------
To select the simplest, most suitable model it is necessary to:
1. Define the objectives of the study.
2. Identify available models which appear to meet the study
objectives.
3. Evaluate each model based on its ability to satisfy the
study objectives within the technical and economic con-
straints applied.
4. Select for use the model most suitable for the project needs.
It is more important to fit the model to the problem rather than to fit
the problem to the model.
Once a model has been selected, it must be adapted to the specific
site or area being studied. A model is adapted through the processes of
calibration and verification. Calibration is achieved by adjusting the
model to reflect site specific field data. After the model has been
calibrated, it should be tested against a second set of field data. If
the second set of field data and the modeled results compare favorably,
the model may be considered to be verified and ready for application.
EPA has indicated that an agreement within a factor of four to five should
be considered indicative of a favorable predictive method.
For a model to be adaptable to industrial applications, it must be
capable of predicting the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff, the
transport of such runoff to a receiving body of water, and the impact
of such runoff on the quantity and quality of the receiving water. Pol-
lutants of primary importance for model simulation include sediment
(suspended and dissolved solids), nutrients (compounds of nitrogen and
phosphorous), pesticides, acidity/alkalinity, pH, organic material
(biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, dissolved oxygen),
-27-
-------
and heat (temperature). In addition, since storm events are dynamic, a
model must also be capable of simulating functions in a dynamic, i.e., time
dependent fashion.
To predict the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff a model must
be capable of simulating the effects of such items as the intensity and
the duration of the storm event, infiltration and drainage characteristics,
the accumulation of pollutants between storms, and the washoff of such pollu-
tants during storms. For continuous simulation of multiple storms, a model
must be capable of simulating dry weather flows as well as storm flows.
To predict the transport of stormwater runoff for industrial land use,
a model must be capable of simulating overland flow and routing in man-made
systems (channels, sewers, etc.).
To describe the impact of the stormwater runoff on a receiving body
of water, a model must be capable of simulating the quantity and quality
responses of the receiving water to the runoff. Again, for continuous
simulation of multiple storms, a model must be capable of simulating dry
weather flows as well as storm flows. For increased flexibility, a model
should be capable of simulating various types of receiving waters including
rivers, lakes, and estuaries.
Based on these model requirements, the models listed in Table 3-4 were
evaluated for suitability, adaptability, complexity, cost, and availability
using the following criteria:
• Wastewater (Runoff) - quantity, quality, dry weather
flows, storm runoff;
• Receiving Water - quantity, quality, river, lake,
estuary;
-28-
-------
TABLE 3-4
MODELS SELECTED FOR EVALUATION
EPA Storrawater Management Model - Release II (SWMM)
Water Resource Engineers Stormwater Management Model
Short Stormwater Management Model - RECEIV II (SSWMM - RECEIV II)
Hydrocomp Simulation Program (HSP)
Dorsch Consult Hydrograph Volume Method
Corps of Engineers Storage, Treatment, Overflow, and Runoff Model (STORM)
Battelle Wastewater Management Model (BWMM)
Metcalf and Eddy Simplified Stormwater Management Model
EPA - Hydrocomp Agricultural Runoff Management Model (ARM)
Pyritic Systems: A Mathematical Model
-29-
-------
• Quality Parameters - temperature, suspended solids, total
dissolved solids, biochemical oxygen demand (BODs), chem-
ical oxygen demand (COD), dissolved oxygen, nitrogen,
phosphorous, pH, oil and'grease, pesticides;
Simulation of Single Storm
• Simulation of Multiple Storms
• Computer Program Availability - Public or proprietary;
• Complexity - high, moderate, low;
Costs - high, moderate, low.
The results of the model evaluation are summarized in Table 3-5.
The EPA Stormwater Management Model (SWMM), Water Resource Engineers
Stormwater Management Model, Short Stormwater Management Model - RECEIV II
(SSWMM-RECEIV II), Hydrocomp Simulation Program (HSP), and Dorsch Consult
Hydrograph Volume Method are capable of dynamically simulating the quantity
and quality of Stormwater runoff and its impact on the quantity and quality
of receiving waters. These models can best be described as runoff and re-
ceiving water models. The quality simulation portion of each of these models
must be modified for industrial application. The quality relationships are
based on land utilization with all types of industry lumped into one land
use category - industrial. No attempt is made to specify the particular
type of industry. To meet the program objectives, then, it is necessary to
develop specific quality relationships, pollutant accumulation, and washoff
characteristics on an industry-by-industry basis for each of the models in
this group.
The Corps of Engineers Storage, Treatment, Overflow, and Runoff
Model (STORM), Battelle Wastewater Management Model (BWMM), and Metcalf
-30-
-------
TABLE 3-5
A COMPARISON OF MODEL CAPABILITIES, APPLICATION, COMPLEXITY, COST, AND AVAILABILITY
Model Identification
Name
EPA SWMM Release 13
WRE_ Stormwater
Management Model
Short SWMM/
RECEIV II
Hydrocomp Simula-
tion Program
Dorsch Consult
Corps, of Engi-
neers Storm
Battelle Waste -
Water Management
Model
Metcalf&Eddy Sim-
plified Stormwater
Management Model
EPA-Hydrocomp Ag-
ricultural Runoff
Management Model
Pyritic Systems: A
Mathematical Model
Date Release<
974
L973
+
L976
[974
L974
L975
L975
L976
L976
L976
L972
Model Capabilities
Waste- Water
Quantity
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p*.
u
•H
r-l
§
o-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Dry Weather
Flows
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Storm Runoff
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Receiving Water
>,
4J
•H
4J
B
X
X
X
X
X
D
Quality
X
X
X
X
X
D
River
X
X
X
X
X
D
01
J-)H f-v
H
H
M
H
H
M
M
L
M
M
Relative Model Cost
H
H
M
H
H
M
M
L
M
M
Computer Program
Available
X
P*
P/X
P
P
X
X
June
1976
X
X
*Cement, feedlots; inorganic chemicals; fertilizer manufacturing; petroleum refining; iron and steel; non-ferrous metals; phosphate manufacturing
timber
- Key -
v _ Yes H = Complex/costly
W = Wastewater only M = Moderately complex/moderately costly
D - Currently being developed L = Simple/low cost
P = Proprietary
-------
and Eddy Simplified Stormwater Management Model are capable of dynamically
simulating the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff, but not its
impact on receiving waters. Consequently, these models are designated as
runoff models. As with the preceding model group (runoff and receiving
water models), the quality portion of the runoff models is not adequate
to meet the program objectives. Again, the quality relationships for runoff
are based on general land utilization categories that do not specify the
type of industry; hence, quality relationships addressing pollutant accumu-
lation and washoff must be developed on an industry-by-industry basis. In
addition to this limitation, the runoff models were not designed to simulate
the impact of stormwater runoff on receiving waters. To simulate this im-
pact, it is necessary to interface the runoff models with a receiving water
f
model.
The EPA - Hydrocomp Agricultural Runoff Management Model (ARM) and
Pyritic Systems: A Mathematical Model are designed to quantify and qualify
stormwater runoff for the agricultural and mining industries, respectively.
These models are described as specific industry models. As with the runoff
models, the specific industry models cannot simulate the impact of stormwater
flows on receiving waters. They must be interfaced with a receiving water
model to simulate such impact. Since ARM was developed specifically for
the agricultural industry, it is not necessary to modify the program quality
relationships but only to calibrate and verify existing quality relationships
with field data. On the other hand, Pyritic Systems: A Mathematical Model
is designed for a drift (subsurface) mine. Extension of this model to sur-
face mining (strip mining) requires both quantity and quality program modi-
fications.
-32-
-------
3.1.4 Background Review Conclusions
In this review, little information was found related to non-point
sources from industrial sites. However, an evaluation of several in-
dustries indicated that runoff from material storage piles and runoff
from accumulated materials due to fallout from fugitive and point source
air emissions are the most probable industrial non-point sources.
The measurement methodology reviewed showed that, while there is
much information concerning sampling of runoff in storm sewers and sampling
receiving waters, overland runoff sampling and industrial runoff sampling
must be further developed. The predictive methodology review yielded
several models capable of being adapted to dynamically simulate the quantity
and quality of stornrwater runoff from industrial sites and its impact on
the receiving waters.
Based on the conclusions of this task, the second and third tasks were
designed as follows:
1. A field measurement survey (runoff and receiving water) to
be designed and performed at two coal-fired utility plants.
2. A mathematical model to be developed capable of quantifying
and qualifying non-point source industrial loading and its
impact on receiving waters on an industry-by-industry basis,
beginning with the utility industry.
3. The field survey data to be used to calibrate and verify
the mathematical model.
Sections 3.2 and 3.3 summarize the field survey and model development,
respectively.
-33-
-------
3.2 Field Survey
3.2.1 Industry Selection(12*(l3)
Electrical energy is generated from fossil and nuclear fuels at
approximately 1,000 sites (1970) in the United States. Coal provides
approximately 54% of the total heat input for electricity generation.
In 1974 this amounted to a coal usage rate of 328 million metric tons
(361 million short tons)* per year. Increasing demands for energy self-
sufficiency are likely to push coal usage up to 454 million metric tons
(500 million short tons) per year by 1990. Subsequently, coal storage,
typically a 100-day supply, will increase from 100 million tons to 138
million tons. Land use for coal storage at electric facilities will
increase to 81 million square meters (20,000 acres) from an approximate
1974 total of 58 million square meters (14,500 acres). Stormwater runoff
from coal storage piles will also increase 38% to an estimated yearly
total of 100,000-140,000 cubic meters per year (26 million to 37 million
gallons per year).
These data show that the quantity of stormwater runoff will probably
increase substantially by 1990. Its effect on the receiving bodies will
become more pronounced as water quality improves through regulation of
point sources. In addition, the industry faces proposed effluent limita-
tions for drainage from coal storage piles. These indicated projections
are the basis for the selection of the coal-fired utility industry for a
sampling program.
*In this report most units are reported first in the metric system
and then in the English system in parentheses. However, in the modeling
section, only English units are used since the models were originally
developed in English units and no attempt was made to convert to the
metric system.
-34-
-------
3.2.2 Site Selection
Two coal fired steam electric generating facilities in Pennsylvania
were chosen for the field study to identify and quantify runoff. Specific
characteristics of each site are shown in Table 3-6.
The Warren Station of the Pennsylvania Electric Company in Warren,
Pennsylvania is a small generating plant (84 MW) and is used primarily as
a peaking facility. It is located on the Allegheny River below the Kinzua
Dam. This dam regulates the river flow at approximately 56 cubic meters/
sec (cms) (2,000 cubic feet/sec (cfs)) with an average velocity of 0.3 to
0.6 meters/sec (1-2 fps). Bituminous coal is delivered by truck to the
station on a daily schedule from mines in Clarion County, Pennsylvania.
Figure 3-4 shows the basic site layout for the Warren Station. Coal
pile runoff is channeled to a drain pipe by a drainage ditch that parallels
unused railroad tracks next to the access road for the coal trucks. The
drain pipe continuously drains small quantities of leachate during dry pe-
riods and substantial quantities of runoff during rainfall events. All
runoff from the coal pile must pass through the drain pipe for discharge
to the river. The paved access road is used by coal trucks to enter and
leave the coal unloading area, and is covered with coal dust and earthen
materials although the pavement is still visible through the accumulation.
The road dust cover is washed off during rainfall events. The water drains
across the road through a rockstrewn area of rubble approximately 12 meters
(40 feet) wide to the river bank. There are several distinctly visible
areas where this road dirt and coal dust are carried to the river. Vege-
tation is nonexistent in these drainage areas. Surface drains on paved
-35-
-------
TABLE 3-6
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TWO SAMPLING SITES USED IN THE SURVEY
Utility
Plant
Location
Capacity
MW output, net
Coal
Usage (metric tons/yr)
Source
Storage, metric tons
Sulfur %
Iron %
Manganese %
Aluminum %
Pennsylvania Electric Co.
Warren Station
Warren, PA
84
315,000
est. 1974
Clarion Co. , PA
27,200
1.84
0.35
0.003
0.56
Metropolitan Edison
Portland Station
Portland, PA
410
840,000
est. 1974
PA & W. VA
172,000
1.47
0.38
0.004
0.37
-36-
-------
SURFACE
x""" DRAINS
ROAD
SITE #1
O SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Figure 3-4: Site Layout with Sampling Locations -
Warren Station of Pennsylvania Electric
Co., Pennsylvania Electric Co., Warren,
PA.
SITE n
*OSAMPLING LOCATIONS
Figure.3-5: Site Layout with Sampling Locations -
Pprtland Station of Metropolitan Edison
Co., Portland, PA.
-37-
-------
areas around the plant discharge into the main cooling water discharge
canal. The surface drains are not effective in collecting stormwater due
to the very irregular pavement surface.
The Allegheny River contained noticeable suspended material such as
silt and detritus during the sampling period. The river water was general-
ly close to air temperature with the downstream temperature approximately
.5 to 1°C higher due to the discharge of plant cooling water at a rate of
3.6 cubic meters per second (57,000 gallons per minute).
The Portland Station of Metropolitan Edison Company is located in
Portland, Pennsylvania on the Delaware River. This 410 MW station is much
larger than the national average of 150 MW and is used as a baseload station.
Bituminous coal is delivered by railroad car from Pennsylvania and West
Virginia mines.
Figure 3-5 shows the basic site layout for the Portland Station. A
substantial portion of the stormwater runoff is intercepted by the ash
settling pond and never flows directly into the river. One sector of the
coal pile runoff does go to a surface drain and is discharged with parking
lot and road runoff into the river. Fly ash is kept on the north side of
the plant (top left near river in Figure 3-5). There was very little fly
ash stored during the sampling period. Stormwater runoff from this site
washes directly into the river.
During the sampling period, the Delaware River had a flow rate of
300 cms (10,500 cfs) and an average velocity of .3 m/sec (1.0 fps). The
water was generally very clear and much colder than prevailing air tempera-
tures. As with the Warren site, the downstream river temperature was
-38-
-------
approximately .5 - 1.0°C higher due to the plant cooling water which was
discharged near mid-river from a subsurface discharge tunnel at an average
rate of 5.4 cubic meters per second (85,000 gallons per minute). The
river height and turbidity changed rapidly with rainfall activity in its
watershed.
3.2.3 Test Plan
A test plan was developed to fit the objective of quantifying the pol-
lutants associated with stormwater runoff and their effect on the receiving
waters. The test plan was designed to determine:
1. Background conditions in the receiving water prior to a
storm event.
2. Volume of and pollutant concentrations in stormwater runoff
as a function of time for the storm event.
3. Effect of the runoff on the receiving water during and after
the storm event.
The following additional data gathering activities were incorporated
to apply to the predictive model development:
1. Air temperature and humidity
2. Dustfall accumulation
3. River flow rates
4. Surface permeability.
To quantify the effect of stormwater runoff on the receiving body a
sampling station was installed upstream of potential plant site effects
and a second station was installed downstream of the plant. Theoretically,
comparison of the data taken at these two sampling sites would show the
-39-
-------
effect of runoff on the river water quality. The sampling sites were to
be placed at locations where representative samples could be taken with
respect to the river cross-section and depth (i.e., samples having uniform
chemical and physical properties). Placement of the downstream site was
most critical because it had to be located at a position which allowed
adequate mixing of the runoff in the river.
To develop the characteristics of the stormwater runoff it was neces-
sary to intercept some amount prior to its entering the river. Each run-
off basin was identified and sampling plugs were deployed to catch
representative samples during a storm event. It was also necessary to
quantify the flow rate of runoff to establish the time variable pollutant
load on the river.
Velocity measurements were used to determine flow in pipes which col-
lected runoff. In areas where sampling plugs had been used, the drainage
area was determined and infiltration tests were performed to calculate the
rate of percolation into the soil. Gross estimates of the total storm
runoff flow were calculated using the total quantity of rain over the
surface area minus the quantity of infiltration.
Composite samples were collected from the river sampling stations and
runoff sites every 10 minutes for the first 90 minutes of a storm event to
insure that the initial effects of the storm (including any possible "first
flush" effects) were measured. For storms of longer than 90 minute dura-
tion, the sampling interval was extended to 30 minutes to avoid the col-
lection of too many samples. Each sample was composited from 5 grab
samples taken in a proportionally smaller time period. Thus, 5 two-minute
grab samples were composited to give a 2 liter 10 minute sample, etc.
-40-
-------
During dry periods before and after storms, samples were collected hourly
from the upstream and downstream sites.
The pollutants analyzed in this program were total suspended solids
(TSS), total dissolved solids (IDS), sulfate (SO^), total iron (Fe),
manganese (Mh) , aluminum (Al), alkalinity (or acidity), and pH. Addi-
tionally, dissolved oxygen (DO) and temperature were monitored in the
river.
The dustfall, surface permeability, and air temperature and humidity
data collected were important to the predictive model development to de-
fine the dynamic behavior of the runoff with time.
To provide the most efficient use of manpower in the field, most
analyses were intended to be performed in a field laboratory. Some spe-
cific analyses were done at the main laboratory when field analysis lag
due to number of samples collected created sample aging difficulties, or
when specialized equipment was needed.
3.2.4 Implementation
3.2.4.1 Warren Station
The field program was implemented without major difficulties. River
samples were collected with an ISCO Model 16800L Sequential Sampler which
was designed to provide backflushing before and after each sampling se-
quence to preserve the time integrity of the sample. The sampler was
programmed to collect 200 ml grab samples every minute to provide a 2
liter composite every 10 minutes during the first 90 minutes of a rain-
fall period. From the 90th minute to the storm's end, the sampler was
-41-
-------
programmed to collect 70 ml every minute to give a 2 liter sample every
half hour. During dry periods the sampler collected 70 ml every 2 minutes
to give an hourly composite of 2.liters.
An upstream site was established 7.6 meters (25 ft) from the river's
edge approximately 152 meters (500 ft) upstream of the cooling water in-
take. This location was well upstream of the runoff area from the access
road. An air filled buoy was used to suspend the pH/DO (dissolved oxygen)
and temperature sensors and the sample line at about half-depth, 1.2 meters
(4 ft) above the bottom. Dissolved oxygen, pH and temperature were mea-
sured with a Model 101 ODEC Aqua Monitor. These data were recorded on a
strip chart recorder during rainfall periods. A river depth profile was
also made at this location as part of the predictive model development.
The downstream site was secured 46 meters (150 ft) from the river's
edge approximately 152 meters (500 ft) downstream from the cooling water
discharge-river interface. Although the turbulent main flow of the river
appeared to be on the opposite side of the river, a mixing test indicated
the sampling location was adequate. One dozen oranges were set adrift
just above the upstream site and their journey was timed past several
landmarks and past the downstream site. After traversing the rapids (ap-
proximately 75% of the distance from the upstream site to the downstream
site), the oranges dispersed across the river fairly evenly. It was
concluded that the downstream site was adequately placed to obtain rep-
resentative data. An inflatable raft was used to suspend the sensor
probe and sample line at 2 meters (7 ft), approximately mid-depth at the
downstream site. The ISCO Sequential Sampler was mounted on the raft
since the distance to shore was too far to run a sample line and maintain
sample line integrity. An Orbisphere Dissolved Oxygen meter and chart
-42-
-------
recorder housed on shore in a tent were used to measure dissolved oxygen
and temperature. River samples were taken in the same time sequence as
the upstream samples. A recording rain gauge was installed at this site
to record the rainfall rate during storm events. A river depth profile
was also conducted at this location.
The runoff drainage areas were very well delineated by the appear-
ance of vegetation between the road and the river. It was difficult to
set the sampling plugs vertically into the rocky, rubble-strewn surface,
so they were installed in the ground at a slight horizontal angle with
the screened opening facing uphill. Approximately 50 plugs were dis-
tributed in the three main drainage areas and were kept covered with tape
until a rainfall event started. A compositing bucket was placed under the
coal pile drain pipe and an ISCO Sequential Sampler was used to collect
runoff samples from this bucket. In operation, the sampler intake was
continually plugged with push-along solids, and the sampler was replaced by
manual sampling.
3.2.4.2 Portland Station
The objective for Portland was the same as for Warren, namely to char-
acterize the coal pile runoff and its effect on the river. The test plan
remained basically unchanged, but modifications in implementing it were
necessary to reflect the specific differences between the two sites.
At Portland a small area of land north of the plant is used for fly
ash storage during winter months. Runoff from this area drains under the
plant fence and into the river. The upstream station was placed just up-
stream from this location approximately nine meters (30 ft.) from
-43-
-------
the shore. An air-Inflatable raft was anchored at the upstream site to
hold the sensors and sample lines at mid-depth, approximately three
meters (10 ft.) below the surface. The swift current, local turbulence,
and rocky bottom created great difficulty when personnel attempted to
anchor the raft to its station. Broken and slipped moorings hindered the
data gathering effort at this site throughout the program.
An ISCO Sequential Sampler was used to collect river samples in
exactly the same fashion as at the Warren site. In place of the ODBC
Aqua Monitor, an Orbisphere dissolved oxygen and temperature meter was
used for those parameters. A battery powered chart recorder was used to
record these data during a storm event.
The lower station was established approximately 30 meters (100 ft.)
downstream from the cooling water discharge tunnel, approximately 230 meters
(750 ft.) from the upstream site. An identical instrumentation and sampling
arrangement as at the upstream site was used.
The coal pile runoff drained to both the ash pond and the storm sewer.
A portion of the runoff to the storm drain was intercepted for sampling.
Initially, an ISCO Sequential Sampler was installed in the storm drain
but large coal particles continually plugged the sample intake line and pump.
To solve this problem, sampling plugs were placed in an array around the
storm sewer inlet. Approximately 25 sampling plugs were also deployed in
the drainage basin of the fly ash storage area. As with the sequential
samplers, samples were collected every ten minutes for the first 90 minutes,
and half hourly for the duration of the storm event.
-44-
-------
During the one storm event sampled at Portland, river conditions
(swift current and rising level) hampered river sampling since the only
access to the river sites was by boat. Due to the turbidity of the run-
off, flow measurements were unsuccessful. The quantity and color of the
solids in the runoff masked the dyes used as flow-timing indicators. The
storm drains were partially clogged in several locations so that velocity
markers could not be used. A second storm could not be sampled at this
site due to a prolonged dry spell, followed by the beginning of cold
weather and freezing conditions.
3.2.4.3 Analytical Procedures
Analysis of samples for pH, sulfate and alkalinity was performed on
site in a field laboratory to guard against the effects of sample de-
gradation. Where extreme values were noted, the samples were returned
to the chemical laboratory in Wethersfield, Connecticut for further
analysis. Samples were also returned to this laboratory for analysis
of total dissolved and suspended solids, acidity, total iron, aluminum,
and manganese. Sulfate samples which required large dilutions were
also returned to the laboratory. All samples were preserved by appro-
priate means for transportation as shown in Table 3-7.
For analysis of alkalinity, appropriate sample aliquots were ti-
trated with standard 0.02 N sulfuric acid using methyl orange as an
indicator. The titration is complete at a pH of 4.0. For samples with
pH values of less than 4.0, acidity titrations were performed on appro-
priate aliquots with standard 0.1 N sodium hydroxide as the titrant to
-45-
-------
TABLE 3-7
PRESERVATION AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
USED FOR SAMPLE ANALYSES
Parameter
PH
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Sulfate
Alkalinity /Acidity
Total Iron
Total Aluminum
Total Manganese
Preservative
None
Cool to 4°C
Cool to 4°C
Cool to 4°C
Cool to 4°C
HN03 to pH <2
HN03 to pH <2
HN03 to pH <2
Concentration
Technique
None
None
None
None
None
Evaporation
Evaporation
Evaporation
Analytical Method*
Determined on site;
Electrometric
Filtration; Evaporation;
Gravimetry
Filtration; Gravimetry
Turbidimetry
Titrimetry
Atomic Absorption;
Air-Acetylene Flame
Atomic Absorption; Nitrous
Oxide-Acetylene Flame
Atomic Absorption;
Air-Acetylene Flame
Limit of
Detection
0.1
0.1 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
1 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
* Analyzed in accordance with procedures described in Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th edition, APHA, AWWA, WPCF, 1975.
-------
a pH of 8.3. Because samples analyzed for acidity were highly colored,
measurement by pH meter was used to identify the endpoint.
The turbidimetric method was used to determine sulfate concentra-
tions. Standard curves were generated daily from known sulfate concen-
trations. Upstream and downstream samples posed no unusual problems.
Direct runoff samples, however, were found to have high sulfate concen-
trations. For these samples large dilutions were necessary to make sam-
ples fall within a workable range. The runoff samples from both sites had
high color and turbidity backgrounds. Turbidity measurements were made
prior to the development of the barium sulfate suspension and this back-
ground value was subtracted from the value after the barium suspension
formed.
Total dissolved and total suspended solids were determined by fil-
tering an appropriate sample aliquot through a tared Gooch crucible con-
taining a standard Reeve Angel type 934 AH glass fiber filter disc.
Weighing of the material remaining on the filter disc after drying at 103°C
is a measure of total suspended solids. The filtrate is placed in a tared
evaporating dish. The material remaining in the dish after evaporation
and drying at 103°C is a measure of the dissolved solids. No significant
problems were encountered in performing this analysis.
In order to determine total iron, aluminum and manganese, it was ne-
cessary to concentrate the samples. Concentration factors varied from
two to four depending on the nature of the sample. The concentration was
accomplished by digestion using nitric acid. Measurement was made by
atomic absorption spectrophotometry using an air-acetylene flame for iron
-47-
-------
and manganese and a nitrous oxide-acetylene flame for aluminum. Standard
curves were generated with each series of analysis by using known concentra-
tions of the appropriate metal.
For the most part pH was determined on site. In instances where time
was a limiting factor, the samples were returned to the laboratory for
analysis. Before pH measurements were made, the meter was standardized
using three buffers of pH = 4.01, 7.00, and 9.18.
Dustfall samples were collected daily from a measured ground area.
These samples were returned to the laboratory for analysis of leachable
material. Each sample was first weighed to determine the total particulate
of dustfall. The samples were then leached in a measured amount of dis-
tilled-deionized water by constant rotation over a seventy-two hour period.
The resulting water solution after filtration was analyzed for pH, total
dissolved solids, sulfate, total iron, manganese and aluminum. The
analysis was then conducted in the same manner as that described for the
water samples. With the exception of pH, results were reported as per-
cent dry weight leachable material of the entire dustfall sample.
3-2.4.4 Quality Control of Analytical Work
At the time of collection each sample was assigned a unique identifi-
cation number which referred to the sampling location, the day sampled and
the time. An inventory of all samples plus the required analysis was then
prepared for submission of the set of samples to the chemical laboratory.
The supervisor of the chemical laboratory received all samples for analysis,
and checked to insure agreement between the actual sample bottles and the
-48-
-------
accompanying inventory log. The supervisor then assigned an analysis number
to the set of samples and scheduled the samples for work-up by laboratory
chemists and technicians.
Once analysis of the samples was completed, all final results and
raw data were returned to the supervisor who reviewed them for accuracy.
The supervisor then selected, at random, ten percent of the set of samples
for re-analysis and returned them to the laboratory. Final results and
raw data were again returned to the supervisor for review and comparison
with previous results for reproducibility. The supervisor then reported
all final results to the project manager. A file is maintained in the
office of the chemical laboratory supervisor which contains all pertinent
data for the specific project such as final results, calculations and pro-
ject memorandums.
Field analysis data were handled in much the same manner. They were
returned to the chemical laboratory for review for accuracy. Where
possible, the supervisor submitted to the in-house laboratory ten percent
of the samples analyzed in the field for repeat analysis in order to
determine reproducibility. The supervisor then approved the field results
for use by the project manager.
All water and wastewater analyses were performed according to pro-
cedures described in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. 14th edition, APHA, AWWA, WPCF, 1975 and Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes, Methods Development and Quality Assurance
Research Laboratory, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974.
-49-
-------
An inventory file is maintained by the chemical laboratory super-
visor of all instrumentation in the laboratory. This file documents
instrument performance and contains such information as manufacturer,
installation date and serial number. Instrument servicing is documented
in this file, including date of the service call, who performed the
service and how the problem was corrected. For analytical balances,
this file serves to document annual service to insure performance within
manufacturer's specifications. Balance files also record calibration by
weight traceable to the National Bureau of Standards.
Each time an analysis is run, a standard curve is generated for in-
strument calibration. For atomic absorption work a copy of each curve
is kept with the instrument to indicate possible trends in instrument
performance such as hollow cathode lamp deterioration. Copies of all
!
standard curves are also kept in the appropriate project file along with
the raw data.
The laboratory maintains a supply of stock standard solutions for
dilution on a daily basis as needed. Stock standard solutions are
clearly labeled with date of preparation, concentration and discard dates.
Monitoring the laboratory's performance is accomplished in several
ways. Periodically during the course of the year, TRC requests from the
Regional Quality Control Coordinator, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, reference samples from any of the following series: nutrient
analyses, demand analyses, mineral analyses, mercury analyses or trace
metals analyses. Once received, these samples are analyzed along with
any set of similar samples presently in-house. Results are compared
-50-
-------
with quoted concentrations for accuracy and corrective action is taken
when necessary.
As part of maintaining an approved Public Health Laboratory license
with the Connecticut State Department of Health, TRC is required to
participate in its proficiency test program. This consists of periodic
mailings of reference samples similar to those described above which must
be analyzed within a specified period of time. Results are returned to
the state laboratory for statistical analysis. A representative from the
State Department of Health also inspects the facility on an annual basis.
The laboratory condition is documented and this record is kept on file at
the Health Department with a copy sent to the laboratory supervisor at TRC,
3.2.5 Results of Field Survey
Despite the less than desirable amount of storm activity at Warren
and Portland, enough data were collected to show some interesting effects.
From the analyses of the coal pile runoff and receiving waters during
dry and wet weather, some general characterizations can be made.
The laboratory analyses of the field data during dry and wet periods
at all sampling stations show a broad range of values. These ranges
of values were substantial enough to mask any apparent relationships be-
tween sites and sampling locations. Several statistical summaries
have been prepared for selected pollutants during dry and wet periods
at the two sampling locations in the receiving body. These summaries
included arithmetic means, standard deviation, coefficients of varia-
tion and best estimates of variance to provide the statistical basis for
-51-
-------
comparisons of results. These tests were performed within 95% confi-
dence limits for the selected pollutants of interest. The 95% confi-
dence limits were defined as:
where:
X = arithmetic mean of data set with n elements
t = percentile of the 't1 distribution at v degrees of free-
dom and (1 - a) confidence limits
S2 - best estimate of sample variance of n elements in data set.
The calculations were done using two-tailed tests with non-detected
values distributed proportionally between 0 and the limit of detection
for the specific pollutant. It was assumed that the distribution of
the data was approximately similar to a normal distribution. A plot
of several sets of data on normal probability coordinates confirmed
this assumption.
Runoff data are presented as time averages and no attempt was made
to evaluate them statistically.
Reliable river dissolved oxygen data were not obtained at either
site. Equipment malfunction and defective sensors were the primary
cause of the problems at both sites.
i
3.2.5.1 Warren Station Data
Table 3-8 shows the range of pollutant concentrations at the vari-
ous sampling locations at the Warren Station. The most significant
-52-
-------
TABLE 3-8
RANGE OF POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION AT THE SAMPLING LOCATIONS
AT WARREN STATION OF PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC CO., WARREN, PA
AUGUST"- SEPTEMBER, 1976
i
Ul
u>
I
Pollutant
Total Suspended
Solids
Total Dissolved
Solids
Iron
Aluminum
Manganese
Sulfate
Total Alkalinity
@ CaCOa
Total Acidity
@ CaCOs
pH
RANGE OF POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS, mg/1
Upstream
Dry
1-21
100 - 170
.14 - .40
N.D.1
.013 - .090
11 - 20
38 - 48
-
6.77 - 7.80
Wet
2-5
60 - 130
.09 - .17
N.D.1
.025 - .040
12 - 17
38 - 42
-
6.60 - 6.76
Downstream
Dry
1-11
80 - 180
.06 - .34
N.D.1
N.D.2- .040
11 - 22
36 - 45
-
6.77 - 7.60
Wet
2-12
-
.09 - 1.03
N.D.1 - 26.6
.030 - .060
12-24
40 - 41
-
6.36 - 6.87
Coal Pile Discharge Pipe
Dry
12 - 19000
2300 - 21700
160 - 23500
20 - 1800
2 - 100
90 - 57000
-
200 - 38000
1.48 - 3.37
Wet
1700 - 13000
2300 - 115000
700 - 1400
70 - 100
9-15
1600 - 2700
-
1900 - 2900
2.35 - 3.36
1None detected, <0.2 mg/1
2None detected, <0.012 mg/1
-------
observation is that the pollutants in the coal pile discharge pipe are
more concentrated during dry weather (leachate) than wet (runoff), as
would be expected.
The downstream pH values do appear lower under both wet and dry
sampling conditions. More data are necessary to establish a cause and
effect relationship between runoff and pH behavior in the river.
Table 3-9 presents the mean concentrations with 95% confidence
limits for selected pollutants in the receiving body. These data show
the extreme variability in the measurements made upstream and downstream.
Generally, the upstream and downstream sites appear to have similar pol-
lutant concentrations but a more detailed analysis was made using Student's
't1 and the 'F1 distribution tests.
Table 3-10 shows the results of the 't1 and 'Ff tests for comparisons
of data from the upstream and downstream sites during dry and wet periods.
The data used in 't' and 'F1 tests can be found in Appendix A (Table A-l).
There is no statistical difference between mean pollutant concentrations
at the upstream and downstream sites during dry weather. The sample vari-
ances for TSS and Fe during the dry period at both sites were statistically
different.
Student's 't' tests were also performed using 60% confidence limits
since no trends appeared using the 95% confidence limits. Comparisons of
the 't' test results did show for 60% confidence limits: Statistically
significant difference between upstream-'dry' and upstream-'wet', downstream-
'dry1 and downstream-'wet', downstream-'wet' and upstream-'wet1 for a major-
ity of the pollutants. The statistically significant differences in these
-54-
-------
TABLE 3-9
MEAN POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS WITH 95%
CONFIDENCE LIMITS IN THE ALLEGHENY RIVER AT
WARREN STATION OF PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC CO., WARREN PA
AUGUST - SEPTEMBER, 1976
Pollutant
TSS
SOtt
Fe
Mn
Alk
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION, mg/1
Upstream
Dry
8.11 ± 2.26
13.89 ± 0.84
0.23 ± 0.02
0.028 ± 0.005
41.65 ± 0.85
Wet
7.25 ± 3.18
15.09 ± 0.94
0.12 ± 0.03
0.032 ± 0.003
40.33 ± 0.94
Downstream
Dry
4.13 ± 2.04
13.83 ± 1.45
0.21 ± 0.09
0.023 ± 0.005
39.33 ± 0.89
Wet
5.50 ± 2.71
16.65 ± 2.25
0.39 ± 0.27
0.043 ± 0.012
40.30 ± 0.34
95% confidence limits = x ± t.
JF
i,.025lln
-55-
-------
TABLE 3-10
COMPARISONS OF MEAN VALUES & VARIANCES WITHIN 95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS
AT UPSTREAM & DOWNSTREAM SITES DURING DRY & WET SAMPLING PERIODS
WARREN, PENNSYLVANIA
AUGUST - SEPTEMBER, 1976
Pollutant
TSS
S04
Fe
Mn
Alk
1
Ui
T TSS
SOi*
Fe
Mn
Alk
TSS
SOv
Fe
Mn
Alk
TSS
SOi,
Fe
Mn
Alk
Degrees of
Freedom
50
44
52
51
65
16
19
17
18
17
45
37
43
44
50
21
26
26
25
32
t Test
7.47
3.06
0.138
0.015
2.59
8.45
4.57
0.495
0.019
1.86
9.26
2.91
0.086
0.017
3.81
6.71
4.96
0.42
0.0202
2. SO
Difference
Between
Means
U P S T R E A
3.98
0.06
0.02
0.005
2.32
U P S T R E A
1.75
1.56
0.27
0.011
0.03
U P S T R E A
0.86
1.20
0.11
0.004
1.32
D 0 W N S T R
1.37
2.82
0.18
0.0200
0.97
Is Difference
Between Means
Significant?
M DRY - DO
No
No
No
No
No
M WET - DO
No
No
No
No
No
M WET - UP
No
No
Yes
No
No
E A M WET -
No
No
No
Marginal
No
Critical 'f for
95% Confidence
WNSTREAM DRY
2.69
2.53
2.416
2.422
2.173
WNSTREAM WET
4.82
3.96
4.36
4.72
4.10
STREAM DRY
2.50
2.57
2.52
2.42
2.44
DOWNSTREAM D
3.38
2.98
3.01
3.10
2.73
'F1 Ratio
3.38
0.55
0.12
2.00
1.72
1.88
0.196
0.011
0.10
6.52
0.43
0.41
0.33
0.10
0.20
R Y
0.77
1.16
3.62
2.00
0.05
Is Difference
Between Variances
Significant?
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yea
Upstream >
Upstream <
Upstream <
Upstream <
Upstream <
Upstream >
Wet < Dry
Wet < Dry
Wet > Dry
Wet < Dry
Downstream
Downstream
Downstream
Downstream
Downstream
Downstream
.
-------
data are mitigated by the comparisons of upstream dry and downstream dry
data which show unexpected differences for TSS, Mn and alkalinity. A
summary of these comparisons is given in Appendix A, Table A-3.
Table 3-11 shows the characteristics of the coal pile leachate during
the dry weather sampling. The site layout with the drainage ditch and
pipe facilitated collecting leachate samples. These data show that the
leachate is concentrated and extremely acidic. The flow rate was very
low and no effect on the river was detected. The total suspended and
dissolved solids concentrations seem to be dependent upon the length of
time since the previous rain. As this time increases, the concentrations
decrease. The color of the leachate remained amber during the dry period.
Table 3-12 shows the rainfall event data collected at Warren,
Pennsylvania. Other than suspended and dissolved solids, the pollutant
concentrations were fairly consistent between the two storms. Since
the first storm was a short-term, moderately intense cloudburst, it was
not possible to collect samples quickly enough to show any immediate
effect of the runoff on the river. From this storm it was verified that
the plug locations for sampling the surface runoff were adequate. The
second storm lasted much longer and provided the bulk of data for the
data evaluation and conclusions.
Table 3-13 presents the characteristics of the coal pile runoff
and the surface runoff from the access road during the second storm event.
At the start of the storm, the "first flush" effect with its higher
pollutant concentrations can be seen. These values generally de-
clined through the rainfall period. Some perturbations do appear
-57-
-------
TABLE 3-11
CHARACTERISTICS OF COAL PILE LEACHATE-DRY WEATHER
AT WARREN STATION OF PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC CO., WARREN, PA
AUGUST - SEPTEMBER, 1976
1
Ul
GO
1
Date
8/25/76
8/27/76
9/16/76
Hours Since
Last Rain
250
17
505
Pollutant Concentration, mg/1
TSS
200
18,700
12
TDS
40,000
82,600
21,700
SOit
57,000
45,000
25,000
Fe
23,500
14,000
9,700
Al
1,800
1,400
1,100
Mn
100
70
70
Acidity
18,000
27 ,000
37,600
PH
2.4
2.1
1.5
Discharge Flow Rate
1pm (gpm)
1.5 (.39)
1.5 (.39)
1.4 (.39)
-------
TABLE 3-12
CHARACTERISTICS OF RAINFALL EVENTS
AT WARREN STATION OF PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC CO., WARREN, PA
AUGUST - SEPTEMBER, 1976
i
Ui
vo
i
! !
i i
1 Site . Storm
;
Warren
1
8/26/76
i
i Total
Elapsed Time Precipitation
min cm (in)
20 , 2.8 (0.11)
i
i
}
2
9/17/76
430 8.9 (0.35)
l ':
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION, mg/1 1
TSS
0.9
i
TDS ! S04 Fe
1679.
l
I
1.5 I 11.
i
i
14.9 21.5
i
i
i
•
12.4 . 19.8
t
\
Mn
0.275
Al pH !
!
3.18 | 3.90 j
i
0.304' 2. 71 i 4.15 j
i
-------
TABLE 3-13
CHARACTERISTICS OF COAL PILE & ACCESS ROAD RUNOFF
DURING SECOND STORM EVENT AT
WARREN STATION OF PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC CO., WARREN, PA
17 SEPTEMBER 1976
TIME
1000 - 1015 - Rain Start
1015 - 1030
1030 - 1045
1045 - 1100
1100 - 1115
1115 - 1130
1130 - 1200
1200 - 1230
1230 - 1300
1300 - 1330
1330 - 1500 - Rain End
POLLUTANT (mg/1)
COAL PILE RUNOFF
TSS
9800
4200
6400
11400
5000
1700
1400
1600
1700
1700
23000
TDS
4600
3300
2400
2400
2500
3700
3800
3100
3000
-
500
SO,
2300
2300
1600
1800
2100
2100
2700
1700
1000
-
200
FE
900
-
700
1400
700
500
-
300
200
-
-
AL
100
-
90
70
80
-
-
-
-
-
-
MN
40
-
10
10
10
-
-
-
-
-
2
ACIDITY
3200
2600
3100
2000
2200
2900
-
-
-
-
500
DISCHARGE
FLOW RATE
1pm (gpm)
22 (5.8)
20 (5.3)
20 (5.3)
17 (4.5)
AVERAGE SURFACE RUNOFF
TSS
11200
1400
4900
4400
3700
3000
1100
3100
1700
1500
2300
TDS
2800
900
900
600
500
400
600
700
700
-
1400
SO k
1000
600
500
900
400
FE
100
i
200
200
-
300
200 j 200
600
500
-
-
1000
-
200
-
-
400
AL
100
40
30
40
50
-
-
40
-
-
70
MN ' ACIDITY
10 1700
5 -' 600
4 ; 600
5 j 500
5 ! 300
.'
- i 100
- ! 500
7 : 500
1
6 : 1000
o
I
-------
since the rain did not fall at a constant rate throughout the day. All
measured pollutant values are lower during rain than during dry periods.
When a comparison of the data in Tables 3-11 and 3-13 is made, it appears
that water stored in the coal pile solubilizes various impurities in
the coal and leaks out very slowly. Rainfall washes out the stored water
within the pile, thus greatly diluting the impurities.
It was noticed that, in comparing the coal pile runoff with the dry
weather leachate, the mass loading per unit time of all pollutants except
suspended solids, is greater during the dry period. A closer examination
of this behavior is warranted.
The surface runoff shows much similarity with the coal pile runoff
as the contaminant levels decreased through the storm's duration. Black
granular material was observed on the access road and runoff surfaces
during the field work and the data do indicate the presence of similar con-
taminants as in the coal pile runoff. The coal pile and surface runoff
responded very quickly to rainfall intensity. The ground around the coal
pile and the surface runoff areas had a very low porosity, practically zero.
Within minutes after the rain stopped, the runoff declined to zero and the
coal pile discharge returned to its prior appearance and flow rate.
The 't1 and 'F' tests presented in Table 3-10 show no statistically
significant effect of runoff on the river. However, in the case of
sulfate, iron, manganese and alkalinity, the sample variances were sig-
nificantly different. In the cases where differences were noted, except
for total alkalinity, the upstream sample variance was lower than down-
stream. This difference is partly related to the sampling locations.
-61-
-------
Although both locations were as representative of the river's cross-
section as could be determined, it is likely that the downstream site
contained a greater number of anomalies. The river was very wide at
this point with a greater probability for peculiarities in flow pat-
terns due to the delta formation, rapids and the large island just up-
stream of the site.
In a comparison of each river site during the wet and dry periods,
the data show only two statistically significant differences. At the
upstream site the data indicate a difference in the mean concentration
of iron. The dry period had much higher concentrations than the wet
period. There was a marginal difference in manganese concentrations
during wet and dry periods at the downstream site. In comparing these
'wet' versus 'dry' variances with upstream versus downstream variances,
it can be seen that they are partly the result of differences in the
characteristics of each site as well as differences created by the rain-
fall events.
3.2.5.2 Portland Station Data
Table 3-14 shows the range of values for each pollutant at the
Portland Station sampling sites. These ranges are similar to those
measured at the Warren Station sites. They commonly vary by up to an
order of magnitude.
The pH values during the short sampling period at Portland appear
to cover a higher range downstream from the plant contrary to pH values
observed at Warren.
-62-
-------
TABLE 3-14
RANGE OF POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION AT THE SAMPLING LOCATIONS
AT PORTLAND STATION OF METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., PORTLAND, PA
OCTOBER 1976
Pollutant
Total Suspended
Solids
Total Dissolved
Solids
Iron
Aluminum
Manganese
Sulfate
Total Alkalinity
@ CaCO 3
Total Acidity
@ CaCO
pH
RANGE OF POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION, mg/1
Upstream
Dry
3-33
43 - 72
.18 - 2.0
N.D1- .63
.03 - .14
10 - 18
12 - 25
-
6.2 - 6.8
Wet
10 - 20
62 - 89
.18 - .45
N.D.1
N.D?-. 03
9-22
16 - 19
-
6.5 - 6.8
Downstream
Dry
2-43
38 - 71
.18 - 1.4
N.D.1- 1.25
.01 - .18
5-12
12 - 21
-
6.3 - 7.2
Wet
4-11
46 - 67
.18 - .63
N.D.1
N.D.- .03
5-11
16 - 20
-
6*6 - 7.2
Coal Pile Runoff
Dry
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Wet
220 - 3800
600 - 7500
18 - 400
2.75 - 88
3.75
380 - 6000
-
300 - 4600
2.35 - 3.10
Fly Ash Pile Runoff
Dry
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Wet
840 -15200
730 - 2500
73 - 245
63 - 200
.03 - 25
100 - 1600
-
11 - 800
2.72 - 3.06
xNone detected, < 0.2 mg/1
2None detected, < 0.012 mg/1
-------
Table 3-15 shows the 95% confidence limits for the upstream and
downstream sites during dry and wet periods. As was true with the
Warren sampling data, most of the Portland data at each river sampling
site seems to be similar during both the 'dry' and 'wet' sampling periods.
A comparison of Portland data with Warren data indicates that the Delaware
River at Portland has higher suspended solids, iron and manganese, but
lower alkalinity and similar sulfate.
Student's 't' and 'F' distribution tests of significance were performed
to establish any apparent relationships between sites and sampling loca-
tions (see Table 3-16). The tests were based on the data shown in Appendix
A (Table A-2).
As expected, the 't1 and 'F' tests on the dry weather data show no
significant differences between means or variances at upstream and down-
stream sites. The sample variances at Portland were noticeably greater
than at Warren, due possibly to the smaller sample size at Portland.
The intrinsic characteristics of each river's behavior, as well as the
sampling techniques used, are also undefined contributors to the sample
variance.
Student's t't tests using 60% confidence limits were also performed
on the Portland data since no trends appeared using the 95% confidence
limits. The 't' test results using 60% confidence limits showed:
1. Statistically significant differences between downstream
'dry' and downstream 'wet' (all five pollutants), up-
stream 'dry' and upstream 'wet' (three pollutants), up-
stream 'wet' and downstream 'wet' (three pollutants).
2. No statistically significant differences between upstream
'dry' and downstream 'dry' except for
-64-
-------
TABLE 3-15
MEAN CONCENTRATIONS WITH 95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS
FOR SELECTED POLLUTANTS AT THE PORTLAND STATION
OF METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., PORTLAND, PA
OCTOBER 1976
Pollutant
TSS
SO it
Fe
Mn
Alk
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION, mg/1
Upstream
i
Dry Wet
12.72 ± 4.86 13.54 ± 5.91
12.86 ± 1.31 14.25 ± 6.12
0.56 ± 0.22 0.30 ± 0.10
0.051 ± 0.016 0.020 ± 0.010
16.07 ± 1.82 ! 17.60 ± 1.42
Downstream
Dry
11.66 ±6.96
10.10 ± 1.10
0.56 ± 0.18
0.055 ± 0.020
15.59 ± 1.26
Wet
7.39 ± 2.20
8.15 ± 1.31
0.43 ± 0.21
0.016 ± 0.006
16.38 ± 0.43
-65-
-------
TABLE 3-16
COMPARISONS OF MEAN VALUES & VARIANCES WITHIN 95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS
AT UPSTREAM & DOWNSTREAM SITES DURING DRY & WET SAMPLING PERIODS
PORTLAND STATION
Pollutant
TSS
SO 4
Fe
Mn
Alk
TSS
SO
Fe
Mn
Alk
TSS
SO
i*
Fe
Mn
Alk
TSS
SO
it
Fe
A.1V.
Degrees of
Freedom
27
35
37
36
29
11
16
16
16
11
16
20
22
21
17
22
31
31
31
23
t Test
17.48
3.32
0.55
0.05
4.20
9.82
7.34
0.631
0.044
2.22
17.40
7.02
0.791
0.058
6.52
20.29
3.38
O.S68
O.O55
3.79
Difference
Between
Means
U P S T R E
1.06
2.76
0
0.004
0.48
U P S T R E
6.15
6.10
0.13
0.004
1.22
U P S T R
0.82
1.39
0.26
0.031
1.53
D 0 W N S T R
4.27
1.95
0.13
O.O39
0.79
Is Difference
Between Means
Significant?
AM DRY - DOWN
No
No
No
; NO
No
AM WET - DOWN
No.
No
No
No
No
EAM WET - UPS
No
No
No
No
No
EAM WET - DOW
No
No
No
No
No
Critical 'f for
95% Confidence
STREAM DRY
2.96
2.62
2.53
2.55
2.86
STREAM WET
5.52
4.12
4.04
4.04
5.52
TREAM DRY
4.12
3.73
3.44
3.50
4.00
NSTREAM DRY
3.29
2.72
2.73
2.73
3.22
'F1 Ratio
0.378
1.18
1.21
0.50
1.65
3.26
5.16
0.091
1.00
4.81
0.350
3.76
0.052
0.100
0.131
0.041
0.861
0.688
o.os
O.O45
Is Difference
Between Variances
Significant?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes Upstream > Downstream
Yes Upstream < Downstream
No
No
No
Marginal Dry < Wet
Yes Dry > Wet
Yes Dry < Wet
No
Yes Dry > Wet
No
No
Yes Dry > Wee
Ve0 Dry >• Wee
-------
A comparison of the 't1 test results with 60% and 95% confidence limits is
shown in Appendix A, Table A-3.
Based on these results, there is some justification that runoff from
the Portland plant was having an effect on the TSS levels and the alkalinity
of the river. The alkalinity decreased indicating that the acidic runoff
was having an effect. However, TSS concentration was lower, probably due
to the cooling water discharge rather than the storm runoff.
The parameters associated with the single rain event at Portland are
presented in Table 3-17. The rain at Portland had noticeably lower con-
centrations of iron, manganese and aluminum than at Warren. Other para-
meters were similar between the two sites.
When compared with the Warren data, the coal pile runoff has sub-
stantially lower concentrations of pollutants (see Table 3-18). In part,
this is the result of the different sampling procedures required at each
site as determined by the site layout. At Warren, the entire runoff
from the coal pile was intercepted by a drainage ditch. At Portland,
only a small portion of the total runoff was captured from a coal pile
that was much farther from the sampling location. Collection of samples
\
had to be made near the surface drain since the terrain near the pile
was uncertain and the survey objective was to examine only the portion
draining to the river. It is also possible that the distance between
the coal pile and the surface drain allowed the soil to filter pollutants
out of the runoff.
Compared with Warren, the response of runoff flow at Portland was
much slower (i.e., there was a greater time lag) with respect to the
rainfall intensity. The runoff did have sufficient force to transport
-67-
-------
TABLE 3-17
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RAINFALL EVENT AT
PORTLAND STATION OF METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., PORTLAND, PA
20 OCTOBER 1976
00
Site
' Portland
Storm
10/20/76
Elapsed Time
min
810
Total
Precipitation
mm (in)
39.2 (1.55)
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION, mg/1
TSS
2.
TDS
102
SO
9.7
Fe
0.18
Mn
ND1
Al
ND2
pH
5.70
Detected, < 0.012 mg/1
2None Detected, < 0.2 mg/1
-------
TABLE 3-18
CHARACTERISTICS OF COAL PILE & FLY ASH AREA RUNOFF
DURING THE RAINFALL EVENT AT PORTLAND STATION OF
METROPOLITAN EDISON CO., PORTLAND, PA
20 OCTOBER 1976
V£>
I
TIME
0700 - 0730
0730 - 0800
0800 - 0830
0830 - 0900
0900 - 1000
1000 - 1100
1100 - 1200
1200 - 1300
1300 - 1400
1400 - 1500
1500 - 1700
1700 - 1830
POLLUTANT (mg/1)
COAL PILE RUNOFF
TSS
240
300
350
-
230
280
-
-
1700
2200
2200
3800
TDS
-
-
500
600
600
3400
-
-
4200
7500
4800
4300
SOit
-
-
500
500
400
2000
-
-
-
6000
-
2600
FE1
20
40
-
60
80
400
-
-
300
-
200
400
AL1
8
19
-
15
15
50
-
-
30
-
50
90
MN1
0.4
0.8
_
0.6
0.5
1.8
-
-
1.6
-
2.5
2.5
ACID-
ITY
290
300
-
370
300
2400
-
-
-
4600
-
2600
FLY ASH AREA RUNOFF
TSS
200
400
-
-
800
1200
6600
-
-
14000
2300
1200
TDS
200
400
-
-
1300
1700
2200
-
-
1800
1000
800
SOit
100
200
-
-
-
1100
1400
-
1200
FE
-
-
-
-
100
200
-
-
200
800 150
700
-
AL
—
-
-
-
-
60
140
—
-
200
60
-
MN
—
-
-
-
-
2.3
1.3
-
-
0.2
1.2
-
ACID-
ITY
10
200
-
-
400
700
900
500
600
500
LConcentrations as entering the river
-------
quite large (1-5 mm) particles. Plug sampling replaced automatic sampling
after the sequential samplers became inoperative from being jammed with
these particles. The plug collectors, even with screen covers, did
collect some of the push-along particles that the sequential sampler did
not. This could explain the change of pollutant concentrations at 1000
hours. The large particles were removed from the sample within a few
hours prior to returning the samples for analysis, but their partial dis-
solution could explain the increase in concentrations. There is also the
possibility that rainfall intensities, with their effect of washing out more
of the soluble material, could have caused this increase. The fly ash pile
area released much higher concentrations of suspended and dissolved
solids into the river than the coal pile runoff released. Acidity,
sulfate, and metals concentrations were lower. The flow from the coal
pile and the fly ash storage area could not be quantified with any success.
If the study had continued for another rain event, semi-permanent weirs would
have been installed to eliminate this problem.
As indicated in Table 3-16, the runoff from the coal pile and fly ash
area did not have any measurable effect on the river. Statistically, there
was no measured difference at either site during the wet and dry sampling
periods. These observations must be mitigated by the small sample size
as well as statistically significant differences in the sample variances.
The sample variances at Portland, except for dry weather comparisons,
are statistically different for each of the compared sample sets. There
is no apparent consistency to these differences with respect to pollutant,
site, or sampling condition. It can be concluded that a rain event does
-70-
-------
introduce an additional degree of variability to the data. The Portland
'dry' data shows no difference in variance between samples taken at the
two sampling sites. This does contrast with the Warren 'dry1 data which
did have some variances. It is inferred that the sampling location is
another factor affecting the Warren data but not the Portland data, where
the river flow pattern was less complex. The sample variances are similar
at Warren and Portland for each pollutant with few exceptions, despite the
slight differences in sample size. Total suspended solids and iron seem
to have the greatest degree of variation at both sites under the different
sampling conditions.
The Warren and Portland Station data do not show any coal pile runoff
impact on the river. It appears sample sizes may be too small to indicate
a definitive conclusion of the runoff effects at either Warren or Portland.
The data certainty can be improved with a larger data base and some im-
provement in sample variances.
3.3 Model Development
Prior to the work described in this report, a mathematical model
had not been developed to quantify and qualify stormwater runoff and to
determine the impact of such runoff on receiving waters for specific
industries, with the exception of agriculture and mining. The objective
of this program was to develop such a mathematical model capable of quan-
tifying and qualifying non-point source industrial loadings and their im-
pact on receiving waters. To increase model utilization, the model was to
be inherently flexible so that it could be applied to various types of
industry with only minor modifications.
-71-
-------
To effectively satisfy the above objective, existing mathematical
models were reviewed (Section 3.1.3) and the model best able to meet
the study objective with the least amount of modification was chosen for
development and adaptation. The model selection, modification, development,
and testing program,and the results are discussed in this section.
3.3.1 . Model Selection
Of the ten models reviewed (Section 3.1.3), the simplest, most flex-
ible model requiring the least amount of modification with the capability
to quantify and qualify stormwater runoff from industry and to determine
the impact of such runoff on receiving waters was the Short Stormwater
Management Model^14) and Receiv Il(15) (SSWMM-RECEIV II).
The Short Stormwater Management Model (SSWMM) and Receiv II (RECEIV
II) are both modified versions of the EPA-SWMM model.(16) SSWMM, developed
by the University City Science Center in 1976, is a simplified version of
the runoff portion of the EPA-SWMM model, and RECEIV II, developed by the
Raytheon Company arid the EPA in 1974, is a modified version of the re-
ceiving water portion of the EPA-SWMM model. When combined, SSWMM and
RECEIV II are capable of dynamically simulating both the quantity arid quality
of stormwater runoff and the impact of such runoff on the quantity and
quality of receiving waters including rivers, lakes, and estuaries. The
user can define, with certain restrictions, the quality parameters which
he chooses to simulate. Pollutant transport can be modeled by both over-
land flow and sewer routing. Dry weather flows can also be simulated.
The model is primarily designed to simulate individual storm events but
can be used to model multiple storm periods.
-72-
-------
Potential model application for both runoff and receiving water simu-
lation includes all industry categories identified in this report; however,
model development and modification is required for any such application.
This includes modifying portions of both SSWMM and RECEIV II and inter-
facing SSWMM and RECEIV II.
SSWMM model simulations of the quantity of stormwater runoff are
adequate for specific industrial land uses, but the quality simulations
are inadequate. Presently, the quality relationship is based on finite
source land utilization with all types of industry lumped into a single
industrial land use category. Consequently, it was necessary to develop
quality relationships and pollutant accumulation and washoff character-
istics on a specific industry basis. RECEIV II modifications were necessary
to enhance model definition which ensures the model's sensitivity to a
specific plant's point and non-point discharges.
3.3.2 Detailed Model Description of SSWMM - RECEIV II
The SSWMM - RECEIV II model as developed in this program consists of
the following four distinct programs:
SSWMM (Short Stormwater Management Model Program)
LNKPRG (Link Program)
SETUP/QUANTITY (RECEIV II Quantity Program)
QUALITY (RECEIV II Quality Program)
SSWMM simulates both the quantity and the quality of stormwater runoff.
LNKPRG interfaces SSWMM and RECEIV II (SETUP/QUANTITY and QUALITY),
while RECEIV II SETUP/QUANTITY simulates hydraulics in the receiving
water and the impact of the stormwater runoff on these hydraulics.
-73-
-------
RECEIV II QUALITY simulates water quality in the receiving water and
the impact of the stormwater runoff on the quality of the receiving
water. A complete model listing for each of the four programs is listed
in Appendix B.
A descriptive flowchart for SSWMM - RECEIV II is presented in Figure
3-6. As indicated in the flowchart, SSWMM - RECEIV II must be operated
in a SSWMM, LNKPRG, SETUP/QUANTITY, QUALITY sequence. SSWMM, LNKPRG,
and SETUP/QUANTITY produce informational output files which serve as input
to the next program in the sequence. QUALITY, the last program in the
sequence, does not generate an output file. Input card decks are required
for SSWMM, LNKPRG, SETUP/QUANTITY, and QUALITY. Results are printed out
for SSWMM, LNKPRG, SETUP/QUANTITY, and QUALITY.
Detailed descriptions for SSWMM, LNKPRG, SETUP/QUANTITY, and QUALITY
are presented below.
3.3.2.1 SSWMM (Short Stormwater Management Model Program)
The Short Stormwater Management Model Program (SSWMM) is primarily
designed to simulate a storm event on a watershed, predicting both
quantity and quality of storm-generated discharges. The analytical
framework used to describe the watershed includes both space and time.
The spatial framework consists of discrete elements that are either
subcatchments (drainage areas within a watershed with overland flow) or
gutters (drainage ditches, pipes, manholes, and inlets, i.e., points of
runoff entry to receiving waters). The temporal framework (computational
timestep length) is user selected.
-74-
-------
LNKPRG
Output
File
/
QUAN
Input
^
QUAN
>
1
fch
QUAN
Printout
^
Fig. 3-6
SSWMM - RECEIVII Flowchart
-75-
-------
SSWMM consists of a MAIN program and seven subroutines which are
briefly described below. More detailed information can be found in the
SSWMM Documentation.(17)
MAIN
The MAIN program in SSWMM performs three specific functions:
1) initialization, 2) control of computational loops, and 3) termination.
1) Initialization is a three step procedure which is done both within
MAIN and in two of its subroutines. The first step calls for SUBROUTINE
READIN, which reads all general input data and specific quantity data for
each element. Next, all necessary variables and vectors must be set to
zero before the storm starts. This is performed within MAIN itself.
Finally, SUBROUTINE QSHEDI is called to initialize all specific quality
data on each subcatchment.
2) Computation of flow and pollutant routing is performed within
two major DO LOOPS: a TIMESTEP loop and an ELEMENT loop. For each time-
step every element calls its specific subroutines to calculate the quantity
and quality of discharges. Subcatchments call SUBROUTINE WSHED to route
water off surfaces and SUBROUTINE QSHEDII to compute pollutant wash-offs.
Pipes and manholes call SUBROUTINE GUTTER to simulate the flow of water
through the sewer system and SUBROUTINE GQUAL to compute pollutant con-
centrations and mass loads.
3) If the user wishes to combine sanitary sewage flow with wet weather
flow, SUBROUTINE DWF is called after stormwater routing has ended. Other-
wise, the program terminates.
-76-
-------
SUBROUTINE READIN
The first subprogram called from MAIN is SUBROUTINE READIN. Its
function is to read the following five classes of input data:
1) General Information about the Simulated Basin, the Storm,
and Output Options.
If the user wishes to save any quantity and quality results on
file, he must specify, within this class of information, the file name
and those elements he wants saved.
2) Specific Information about the Storm
This includes the length of the storm (number of rainfall intervals),
and the rainfall intensity in each of these intervals.
3) Specific Quantity Parameters for Each Element
Element connectivity, areas of subcatchments, pipe lengths and
diameters, flow widths and slopes are characteristics of this information.
4) General Quantity Parameters
This class of information is common to either pipes or subcatchments.
Manning's coefficients, storage depths, infiltration rates, and decay
coefficients are typical of this needed data. Default values from SWMM
are often used for these variables.
5) General Quality Information
Unlike the EPA SWMM model, SSWMM allows much flexibility with this
data. The model can simulate up to eight pollutants. Previous to the
discretization methodology, one must first select eight major land uses
characteristic of the entire watershed. (SWMM defaults its land uses.)
Upon doing so, eight dust and dirt loading rates (estimated areas of
pollutant accumulation per land use) are submitted as data. It is also
-77-
-------
necessary to choose eight pollutants that will be routed in the drainage
system. The concentration of each of these in a typical catchbasin with-
in the region is then required as input, stored in a 1 x 8 vector. The
concentration of these constituents on the watershed (mg pollutant/gin
of dust and dirt) is stored in an 8 x 8 matrix containing eight pollutant
concentrations for each of the eight land uses selected.
SUBROUTINE QSHEDI
Prior to the storm, subroutine QSHEDI is called from MAIN for each
subcatchment. Its function is to read specific quality information about
each watershed and compute initial pollutant loads both on its surface
and in its catchbasins.
Specific quality information, as general quality information, is
also very flexible. After eight major land uses have been chosen, the
percentage of each of these within each subcatchment should be estimated
and verified so that they need not be changed during model Calibration/
Verification (C/V). Input of the number of catchbasins within each sub-
catchment, the total area of each land use within each subcatchment, and
a removal efficiency needed for pollutant initialization should then be
included.
Pollutant initialization on the surface is a multistep procedure.
The first step is to calculate the total amount of dust and dirt on the
surface. Next the total concentration of each pollutant in a gram of
dust and dirt is summed over all land uses within each subcatchment.
These eight concentrations are then multipled by the total amount of
dust and dirt on the surface to obtain the final pollutant mass load
accumulation before the storm starts.
-78-
-------
Pollutant initialization in catchbasins is computed for each con-
stituent by multiplying the estimated amount of water in one catchbasin
by the total number of catchbasins in the subcatchment times the concen-
tration of the specific pollutant within a catchbasin.
SUBROUTINE WSHED
Subroutine WSHED is called from MAIN for each subcatchment for every
timestep. Its major function is to compute flow (quantity off the surface).
This flow is based on the rainfall intensity during the current timestep,
c
and a water depth on the surface accumulated from the previous rainfall
timestep.
Total flow off the watershed is summed over three flows particular
to three land surfaces. They are: 1) the impervious area of the sub-
catchment with immediate runoff, 2) the impervious area of the subcatchment
without immediate runoff, and 3) the pervious area of the subcatchment.
A depth for each type of land surface is calculated using the Newton-Raphson
iterative technique and a modified Manning's equation. If the depth
correction function does not converge within 11 iterations, a convergence
error is printed and input data must be modified. Flow for each land sur-
face is then calculated by subtracting infiltration (if any) and the Newton-
Raphson depth correction factor from the new rainfall and multiplying this
result by the surface area. Total flow off the surface is computed by
summing the three flows particular to the three land surfaces.
Calculation of infiltration on the pervious area of the watershed
is computed by Horton's equation for every timestep for each watershed.
The infiltration is accumulated as well as the total amount of rainfall
-79-
-------
and printed at the end of the stormwater routing process. Surface
storage, however, is calculated only during the last timestep for each
element over the pervious area of the watershed and the impervious area
that retains some water. It is also printed at the end of the drainage
process.
SUBROUTINE QSHEDII
Subroutine QSHEDII is called from MAIN after flows have been routed
off the watershed's surface. This subprogram computes pollutant washoff
from the surface and out of its catchbasins.
Computations of pollutants off the surface use an exponential de-
cay function, as well as the amount of pollutant remaining on the surface
at the end of the previous timestep and the average flow between the
current and previous timesteps. The exponential decay function is based
on the average flow over the area, an exponential decay coefficient, and
the timestep length. Pollutants remaining on the watershed at the end of
this timestep are calculated by taking the previous amount of pollutants
on the surface minus the pollutants being washed off for the current time-
step.
The amount of pollutants coming out of the catchbasins is calculated
using an exponential decay function and the amount of pollutants remaining
in the catchbasins at the end of the previous timestep. This function
also uses the average flow and the total amount of water in all the catch-
basins. Pollutants remaining in catchbasins at the end of the timestep are
calculated the same way as pollutants remaining on the surface.
Total pollutant washoff is finally summed as pollutant washoff from
the surface and pollutants flushed from the catchbasins.
-80-
-------
SUBROUTINE GUTTER
Subroutine GUTTER is called from MAIN to route water and pollutants
through sewer pipes and manholes. Unlike Subroutine WSHED, this sub-
program must sum all water coming from upstream elements. These ele-
ments may be a watershed(s) and/or a gutter(s). Pipes and manholes
will always have at least one upstream element but never more than three.
Similar to WSHED, GUTTER is executed for all pipes and manholes
for every timestep. Its function is to produce a final depth in each
element at the end of each timestep, and a flow from that element.
This subroutine also uses the Newton-Raphson numerical method and
a modified Manning's equation to determine a depth correction factor.
If the equation involved does not converge within thirty iterations,
an error is generated and input data must be checked. To eliminate con-
vergence errors one may add more iterations or halve the timestep size.
Another possibility of error arises when too much water is allowed to
flow into the pipe and the element surcharges. In this case, pipe
sizes should be checked and altered, or the TRANSPORT BLOCK of SWMM
should be run.
Generally speaking, total flow out of a pipe is an average flow
over the entire timestep. It is calculated using the depth from the
previous timestep and the modified depth from the current timestep.
This flow ±s then emptied into the downstream pipe or manhole for .fur-
ther routing.
SUBROUTINE GQUAL
Subroutine GQUAL is immediately called from MAIN after stormwater
has been routed in GUTTER. This subprogram produces quality results
-81-
-------
within pipes and manholes. It is similar to Subroutine GUTTER in that
upstream contributions must first be added to the element. These pol-
lutant contributions, from either subcatchments or pipes, are stored
in a flux vector needed for quality computation.
Unlike the EPA Storm Water Management Model, SSWMM computes pol-
lutant concentrations using a mass balance equation and the concept of
a continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR).
M. . . + M. . . = M. . + M. .
i-l, j, o i, j-1, r i, 3, r i, 3, o
where:
i = element
j = timestep
o = out
r = remaining
This mass balance equation states that pollutants coming into an ele-
ment plus the pollutants left in the element from the previous timestep
must equal the pollutants going out of the element plus the pollutants
remaining at the end of the current timestep. When using the concept
of a CSTR, it is assumed that concentration going out and concentration
remaining are equal. This enables the attainment of a mass accountabil-
ity for all pollutants in all elements.
Besides producing quality results, Subroutine GQUAL also sums
total gutter flow out of the last downstream element. After the sys-
tem has drained, a check for unaccounted water is made and a percentage
error is calculated. The unaccounted water is equal to the total
-82-
-------
rainfall minus (infiltration, gutter flow, and storage), divided by the
total rainfall. Results are considered reasonable if this error is within
two percent.
SUBROUTINE DWF
Unlike all the other computational subprograms, DWF makes no esti-
mation of flow or pollutant concentrations of sanitary sewage discharges.
Data with this information must be supplied by the user along with the
diurnal variation, based on a 24-hour cycle. Dry weather flow is cal-
culated by multiplying the sanitary sewage flow times the variation.
This flow, calculated for each timestep, is then added to the flow cal-
culated for each corresponding timestep under wet weather conditions.
Pollutant mass loads are also calculated for each timestep by multiplying
the sewage pollutant concentration times the diurnal variated flow.
These mass loads are also added to the mass loads produced from wet weather
conditions and printed as output.
As discussed above, SSWMM input includes information such as phys-
ical descriptions of the discretization elements, storm activity, ante-
cedent pollution generation, and washoff data. Detailed input information
requirements for SSWMM are listed in Appendix C of this report.
Output information (printout and file) is described in Tables 3-19
and 3-20. Primary output components are time-dependent, storm-generated
flows and pollutant mass loads.
The utilization of SSWMM is influenced by inherent program assump-
tions and by modifications TRC has made. SSWMM was not designed to
simulate stormwater percolation through or the erosion of material stor-
age piles (infinite sources) but only to simulate stormwater runoff.
-83-
-------
TABLE 3-19
SSWMM PRINTOUT
1. General input data and characteristic element data
2. All computed pollutant loads initially on each watershed and
in its catchbasins for the first timestep.
3. Convergence errors on watersheds*
4. Convergence errors in pipes*
5. Surcharge in pipes*
6. Flow and mass loads for each constituent for every timestep**
7. Total rainfall, total infiltration, total runoff, total storage,
and the error computed for unaccounted water.
8. Total runoff (wet weather flow and dry weather flow), total pollu-
tant mass loads for any eight constituents computed under dry and
wet weather conditions.
* NOTE: Convergence and surcharge errors must be corrected to
insure correct quantity and quality results.
** NOTE: Flow and mass loads will be printed out only for those
elements specified in the input vector ISAVE.
-84-
-------
TABLE 3-20
SSWMM OUTPUT FILE
1. Title Read in
2. Number of timesteps
Number of inlets
Number of pollutants to be saved on file
Timestep length (sec)
Time storm starts (sec)
Total area (acres)
3. Inlet numbers being saved
4. Print at end of each timestep
Time (sees), flows (ft3/sec) for each inlet, up to a
maximum of 8 pollutant mass loads (Ibs/min) for each inlet
-85-
-------
When total settleable solids and total suspended solids are selected
for modeling, they must be chosen as pollutant numbers one and two
respectively, since SSWMM uses a distinct computational procedure for
each of these pollutants. Other pollutants, arbitrarily chosen by the
user, must be modeled as pollutant numbers three through eight. Fecal
coliform cannot be modeled in the TRC modified version of SSWMM. TRC
has also modified SSWMM so that the initial pollutant load buildup on
the land surface is not a function of gutter length in each subcatchment
but is a function of the area of each land use within each subcatchment
which is more representative of industrial sites.
3.3.2.2 LNKPRG (Link Program)
The LNKPRG Program serves to interface the SSWMM and the RECEIV II
(SETUP/QUANTITY, QUALITY) programs.
Specifically, LNKPRG:
1. Relates the startup time of the storm in SSWMM to the
startup time for RECEIV II.
2. Establishes an ordered array correlating the position
of pollutants in the SSWMM output file to the position
of pollutants in the RECEIV II input array.
3. Identifies the names of the pollutants in the RECEIV II
input array.
4. Converts the flow and pollutant loadings on the SSWMM
output file from English to metric units (flow from CFS
to m3/sec and pollutant loadings from Ibs/min to rag/sec)
in conjunction with correlating the SSWMM timestep length
to the RECEIV II (QUANTITY) timestep length. When the
SSWMM timestep length is less than the RECEIV II (QUANTITY)
timestep length, the flow and pollutant loading values on
the SSWMM output file are averaged over the RECEIV II
(QUANTITY) timestep. When the SSWMM timestep length is
greater than or equal to the RECEIV II (QUANTITY) timestep
length, the flow and pollutant values on the SSWMM output
file are not changed by LNKPRG as a function of time.
-86-
-------
5. Introduces all additional (non storm-related) point source
flows and loadings, i.e., background river flows and pol-
lutant loadings, tributary flows and pollutant loadings,
river withdrawals due to river branching, and industrial
withdrawals and discharges to RECEIV II.
Input information to LNKPRG includes the SSWMM output file and an
input card deck. The card input consists of program interface instruc-
tions. Details are listed in Appendix C of this report.
Output from LNKPRG is provided on file and as printout. The file
provides metric flow and pollutant loading information to RECEIV II
(SETUP/QUANTITY, QUALITY) at the RECEIV II (QUANTITY) timestep length,
while the printout lists metric flow and pollutant loadings at each of
the SSWMM timesteps.
Limitations to LNKPRG include the following:
1. The RECEIV II (QUANTITY) timestep length must be a multiple
of the SSWMM timestep length.
2. Additional point source flows and loadings are considered
as steady state (constant as a function of time).
3.3.2.3 SETUP/QUANTITY (RECEIV II Quantity Program)
SETUP/QUANTITY processes the information from LNKPRG and computes
the flow characteristics in the receiving water and the impact of the
stormwater runoff on the receiving water flow characteristics. More
detailed information than that presented below can be found in the RE-
CEIV II Documentation Report. (18)
SETUP is a subroutine of QUANTITY. It creates an information file
from the LNKPRG Program output file and card deck input which is used
-87-
-------
by both the RECEIV II Quantity Program and the RECEIV II Quality Pro-
gram.
QUANTITY computes the temporal and spatial distribution of flow
in the receiving waters. The analytical framework used to describe
the waterway includes space and time. The spatial framework uses the
discrete element method in which state variables such as water surface
elevation are computed at nodes (junctions) and transport (flow and
velocity) is computed in channels linking the nodes. The temporal
framework consists of discrete, uniform timesteps selected by the user.
"The fundamental equations of the QUANTITY model are the reduced,
one-dimensional form of the equation of motion for uniform, incompres-
sible flow in the open channels between the nodes:
I? = -V f -F f + F w (1)
and the continuity equation expressing conservation of mass of an in-
compressible fluid in the open-topped nodes:
A f - -Q (2)
where:
v = velocity (m/s)
t = time (s)
x = distance along the channel (m)
H = water surface elevation referenced to datum plane of
the model (m)
g = gravitational acceleration
(- 9.8 m/s2)
-88-
-------
Ff = acceleration due to fluid resistance (m/s2)
FW - acceleration due to wind stress (m/s2)
Q = the net flow out of the node (m3/s)
A = the surface area of the node (m2)
The acceleration due to fluid resistance is estimated by the Manning
formula:
R«/3
(3)
where:
n = Manning's roughness factor (s/m1^3)
R = hydraulic radius (m)
The acceleration due to wind stress is estimated by the Ekman formula:
v = K ^a U2 cos ¥ (4)
w R p
w
where:
K = windstress coefficient (^0.0026)
P
— = ratio of air density to water density (-1.165-10 3)
pw
U = wind speed (m/s)
¥ = angle between the wind direction and the axis of the chan-
nel." 19
Input requirements for SETUP/QUANTITY are quite extensive and in-
clude geographical, meteorological, and hydraulic information on the
waterway, and flow and pollutant loading information describing discharges
to and withdrawals from the waterway. This input information is pro-
vided by the LNKPRG output file and two input card decks. Specific
-89-
-------
input data for SETUP/QUANTITY is described in Appendix C of this report.
Output from SETUP/QUANTITY includes files and printout. Both
SETUP and QUANTITY produce output files. The SETUP file provides QUANTITY
with information from LNKPRG and as such serves as an interface. The
QUANTITY file contains information on the stage or tidal height at each
node, the flow in each channel, and the velocity in each channel. In
addition, QUANTITY provides a computational printout which includes the
same information as contained on the QUANTITY file.
Limitations to SETUP/QUANTITY result from assumptions made in the
program and the modifications made to the program during this project. A
fundamental limitation of the SETUP/QUANTITY program is that river channels
must be represented as being rectangular. This approximation can break down
under low flow conditions in a river. Another limitation inherent in the
program is that the QUALITY timestep must always be greater than or equal
to the QUANTITY timestep. In addition, the ratio of the user selected
QUALITY to QUANTITY timestep is a function of river velocity. For instance,
for velocities of 0.5 meters/sec, the ratio of the user selected QUALITY to
QUANTITY timestep must be less than or equal to 12 to insure computational
stability.
In addition, TRC has modified SETUP/QUANTITY by:
1. Reducing the maximum number of nodes that can be modeled
from 100 to 10.
2. Reducing the maximum number of channels that can be modeled
from 225 to 10.
3. Expanding the node and channel printout arrays from 30 print
cycles to 250 print cycles while reducing the number of nodes
or channels for which data can be printed out from 50 to 10.
4. Placing the portion of the CONTROL DATA Input Deck applicable
to QUANTITY directly into the SETUP/QUANTITY program.
-90-
-------
Modifications 1 through 3 were performed to enhance the sensitivity
and applicability of SETUP/QUANTITY for specific near-field industrial
applications which require small scale geographic discretization and
small timestep length choices. Modification 4 was made to simplify
model use.
3.3.2.4 QUALITY (RECEIV II Quality Program)
QUALITY uses the flow characteristic information from SETUP/QUAN-
TITY to compute water quality in the receiving water and the impact of
the stormwater runoff on that water quality. More detailed information
than that presented below can be found in the RECEIV II Documentation.
As with SETUP/QUANTITY, QUALITY uses an analytical framework of
space and time to describe the waterway. The spatial framework uses the
discrete element method in which state variables such as constituent con-
centration are computed at nodes. The temporal framework consists of
discrete, uniform timesteps selected by the user.
"The fundamental form of the equations describing volumetric average
water quality constituent concentration in a node is:
dC = !_ _ M dV
dt V V7 dt
where:
C = volumetric average constituent concentration
(typically, gm/nr)
M = constituent mass in node (typically, gm)
V = volume of node (m )
-91-
-------
Equation (5) expresses the concept of conservation of mass in a control
volume, frequently called a continuously stirred tank reactor. The deriva-
tives on the right can be evaluated in terms of the flows and constituent
masses crossing the boundaries of the node, and in terms of the biochemical
reactions taking place in the node:
^ = i ZQ.J (C.. -C) + ZQ± (Ci - C) + EMg - EMd (6)
where Q. = flows entering node from upstream nodes (m3/s)
J
Q. = flows entering node from point and non-point sources
1 (mVs)
C. = concentration of constituent entering node from upstream
nodes (typically, gm/m3)
C. = concentration of constituent entering node from point and
non-point sources (typically, gm/m3)
M = rate of constituent mass gained due to biological, physical
or chemical processes in the node (typically, gm/s)
M = rate of constituent mass lost due to biological, physical
or chemical processes in the node (typically, gm/s)
The interactions among the 11 water quality constituents modeled in RECEIV-II
are presented in the (ZM + EM,) terms. For example, the rather complex
interactions affecting the dissolved oxygen are formulated as:
(ZMg - ZMd) - k9 (C*-C9) - k7C7 - ag, kkk Ck - a9, 5k5C5
a9, 8 (G8 - D§) C8 - (b/R) (7)
where Cg = nodal concentration of DO
C* = saturation concentration of DO
-92-
-------
g = DO reaeration rate
C7 = nodal concentration of carbonaceous BOD
k? = rate of oxidation of carbonaceous BOD
Cit - nodal concentration of ammonia nitrogen
kit = rate of oxidation of ammonia nitrogen to
nitrite nitrogen
a9> it = stoichiometric ratio of oxygen in nitrite
GS = nodal concentration of nitrite nitrogen
ks - rate of oxidation of nitrite nitrogen to
nitrate nitrogen
ag» 5 = stoichiometric ratio of oxygen in nitrate
C$ = nodal concentration of chlorophyll 11
GQ = "growth" rate of chlorophyll a_
D8 = adjusted "death" rate of chlorophyll a_
ag, s = stoichiometric ratio of oxygen produced per
unit "growth" of chlorophyll a_
b = benthic oxygen demand
All reaction rates (k's) are adjusted for the effects of temperature
during computation. Equations for computation of BOD oxidation rate, DO
surface reaeration, DO reaeration at dams, saturation DO and exchange at
the tidal boundaries are detailed in the RECEIV-II Documentation Report".
Input requirements for QUALITY include the output files from SETUP/
QUANTITY and a card deck input. The card input includes information such
as initial pollutant concentrations in the receiving water and pollutant
reaction kinetics (reaction rates, water temperatures, and temperature
compensation coefficients). Specific card inputs for QUALITY are described
in Appendix C of this report.
-93-
-------
Output from QUALITY is in the form of printout. The primary compu-
tational outputs include pollutant concentrations at each node at the user
selected timestep, and maximum, minimum, and average pollutant concentra-
tions on a daily basis for each node.
QUALITY was modified to recognize six new constituents including
sulfates (SULFATES), total iron (TOTAL FE), manganese (MANGANESE), aluminum
(ALUMINUM), total dissolved solids (IDS), and total suspended solids (TSS).
The new constituents were placed in the following order:
Former Constituent Name New Constituent Name
Total Nitrogen - SULFATES
Phosphorous - TOTAL FE
Coliforms - MANGANESE
Ammonia
Nitrite
Nitrate
Carbonaceous BOD - ALUMINUM
Chlorophyll A
Dissolved Oxygen
Salinity - TDS
Metal Ion - TSS
Reaction rates for the new constituents should be set to 0.0 in the QUALITY
input card deck as these constituents are treated as non-reactive elements.
As with SETUP/QUANTITY, the portion of the CONTROL DATA INPUT DECK applicable
to QUALITY was placed directly into the Quality Program to simplify model use.
3.3.3 Model Application
After the model development work was completed, SSWMM-RECEIV II was
used in conjunction with the field sampling program (Section 3.2)
to simulate the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff and its impact
-94-
-------
on the quantity and quality of receiving waters at two coal-fired elec-
tric generating plants. As indicated in Section 3.2.2, the two plants
were the Warren Generating Station on the Allegheny River in Warren,
Pennsylvania and the Portland Generating Station on the Delaware River
in Portland, Pennsylvania. The pollutants modeled included total sus-
pended solids, total dissolved solids, sulfates, total iron, manganese,
and aluminum. Each of these pollutants was treated as a non-reactive
substance.
In total, four model runs were made; three at Warren and one at
Portland. The three model runs made at the Warren Generating Station
were:
1. Run 1 - An initial model run with the September 17,
1976 storm
2. Run 2 - A calibration model run with the September
17, 1976 storm
3. Run 3 - A verification model run with the August 26,
1976 storm.
Run 1 was an initial model run of the storm of September 17, 1976 with
first estimates made for selected model inputs. In Run 2, new esti-
mates for the selected model inputs for Run 1 were made so that the
model results would compare more closely to field measurements during
the September 17, 1976 storm. Hence, the model was calibrated. The
September 17, 1976 storm was used for calibration since both storm-
water flow and pollutant concentration data were available from the
field measurement program; only stormwater pollutant concentration data
were available from the field measurement program for the August 26,
1976 storm. In Run 3 the calibrated model was tested (without changing
-95-
-------
the new estimates made in Run 2) with a second set of storm conditions
from the storm of August 26, 1976. This was a verification run.
The one model run made at the Portland Generating Station was desig-
nated as Run 4, the storm of October 20, 1976. Run 4 was intended to
test the ability of the model to simulate stormwater runoff conditions
at a second power plant with different operating characteristics. This
represented a limited test of the model's universality or ability to
be transferred to different sites in the utility industry.
Fundamental model inputs and important results for Runs 1 through 4
are discussed below in Sections 3.3.3.1 and 3.3.3.2. A complete listing
of the model inputs for Runs 1 through 4 is presented in Appendix D.
3.3.3.1 Fundamental Model Inputs
Fundamental model inputs to SSWMM - RECEIV II include dividing land
areas and the receiving water into discrete elements, pollutant generation
activity on land, storm activity, and background flow and pollutant loadings
in the receiving waters.
The discrete element scheme used as input at Warren for Runs 1, 2, and
3 is illustrated in Figures 3-7 and 3-8 and is described in Tables 3-21
and 3-22.
As depicted in Figure 3-7, the land area was divided into three water-
sheds based on drainage patterns and land use. These watersheds are repre-
sented by elements 1, 4, and 6. The discharge point of drainage from
each of the three watersheds to the river is classified as an
-96-
-------
r
•
r-
cooling
dischargi
Cooling water
discharge canal
I
Legend
C~J Element number
Watershed boundary (subcatchment)
*
Fig. 3-7
Discretization scheme schematic
of land area; Warren, PA.
-97-
-------
River mi. 185.43- Field Station 20
River mi. 185.04
River mi. 184.69
Artificial Dam - elev. 0.0 (
CC
LU
UJ
X
o
Ul
•ly River mi. 186.92
River flow - 68.66 m3/sec (2424 cfs)
River mi. 185.83 - Field Station 10
'jj>4\ River mi. 185.73 Cooling water withdrawal - 3.6 m3/sec (127eft)
Coal pile storm and direct runoff input
River mi. 185.63
Cooling water input - 3.6 m3/sec (127 cfs)
Branch withdrawal -17.9 m3/sec (632 cfs)
Storm sewer input
River mi. 184.33
Branch Input -17.9 m3/sec (632 cfs)
10
River mi. 184.10
Legend
Node (Junction)
1 Node (Junction) number
1 Channel
Channel number
Fig. 3-8
Discretization scheme schematic
of Allegheny River; Warren, PA.
-98-
-------
TABLE 3-21
DISCRETE LAND ELEMENTS
WARREN, PA
Element No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Type1
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
Width
(ft)
338.00
1.00
0.00
488.00
0.00
275.00
25.00
0.00
Slooe
(ft /ft)
0.0180
0.1370
0.0000
0.1370
0 . 0000
0.0450
0.0220
0 . 0000
AR OR GL2
2.61
153.13
0.00
1.71
0.00
2.53
325.00
0.00
PI OR DF2
100.00
0.95
0.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
23.75
0.00
*Type 1 Is a watershed
Type -2 is a pipe or manhole
2AR = Area of watershed (Ac); PI
GL = Pipe length (Ft) ; DF
Percent imperviousness (%)
.95 * Width
-99-
-------
TABLE 3-22
DISCRETE RIVER ELEMENTS
WARREN, PA
Nodes (Junctions)
Junction
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Surface Area
(Sq M)
184072.00
111646.00
29350.00
23184.00
39078.00
68644.00
75948.00
80203.00
47265.00
47265.00
5
Channels Entering Junction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Channels
Channel
Number
1
2
3
Length
(M)
1384.
370.
161.
4 i 161.
5 ; 307.
6 460.
7 383.
8
690.
Width
(M)
133.
106.
121.
167.
167.
187.
172.
137.
Manning Bottom Elev
Coefficient ' (M - POS DN)*
0.033 ! -1.7
Junctions at Ends
1 2
0.033 -1.6 2 3
0.033 -1.4
0.033 ', -1,2
0.033 -1.2
0.033 | -1.2
0.033 -1.0
3 4
4 5
5 6 -
6 7
7 8
0.033 , -0.4 ! 8 9
!
(M - POS DN): Measured positive downward from data plane.
-100-
-------
inlet. These inlets are labeled as elements 3, 5, and 8. The first
watershed (element 1) represents the coal pile drainage area. The run-
off from this area enters a culvert (element 2) which empties into the
Allegheny River at element 3. The second watershed (element 4) describes
the drainage area between the plant, the coal pile, and the river. Run-
off from this area enters the Allegheny River at element 5. The third
watershed (element 6) includes the drainage area adjacent to the plant.
Runoff from this drainage area enters the cooling water discharge canal
(element 7) which empties into the Allegheny River at element 8. Phys-
ical dimensions for each of these elements are listed in Table 3-21.
Based on the physical characteristics of the river and the loca-
tion of the stormwater runoff discharges to the river, the Allegheny
River was divided into ten nodes and eight channels, as illustrated in
Figure 3-8. Background river flow and pollutant loadings enter node 1.
Stormwater runoff discharges from the coal pile drainage area (element 1)
and the drainage area between the plant, coal pile, and the river (ele-
ment 4) enter the river at node 4, and the stormwater runoff discharge
from the drainage area adjacent to the plant (element 6) enters the
river at node 5. Cooling water for the power plant is withdrawn at node
4 and is discharged at node 5. The river branches at node 5 and is
unified at node 9. Since the model requires the last node in the dis-
cretization system to be immediately downstream from a dam, even if one
does not exist, an artificial dam, i.e., a dam with no elevation above
the river bottom, was placed between nodes 9 and 10. Channels connect
each of the nodes except where the nodes are interrupted by the dam.
-101-
-------
The physical characteristics for the node and channel discretization
i
scheme are listed in Table 3-22.
The discrete element scheme used as input at Portland for Run 4 is
illustrated in Figures 3-9 and 3-10 and described in Tables 3-23 and
3-24.
Based on drainage patterns and land use, the land area was divided
into four watersheds labeled as elements 1, 3, 5, and 8 in Figure 3-9.
The four watersheds discharge to the Delaware River at two inlet points
represented as elements 2 and 11. The first watershed (element 1) rep-
resents the ash handling and ash pile drainage area. The runoff from
this area enters the Delaware River overland at element 2. The second
watershed (element 3) is the drainage area for the plant substation,
the third watershed (element 5) is the drainage area for the coal pile
runoff, and the fourth watershed (element 8) is the drainage area adja-
cent to the plant. Stormwater runoff from these three watersheds enters
a storm sewer system described by elements 4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 which in
turn discharges to the Delaware River through element 11. The physical
dimensions for each of these elements are listed in Table 3-23.
Based on the physical characteristics of the Delaware River and
the location of the stormwater discharges to the river, the Delaware
River was divided into seven nodes and five channels, as illustrated in
Figure 3-10. Background river flow and pollutant concentrations enter
node 1. Stormwater runoff discharges from the ash handling and ash pile
area (element 1) enter the river at node 3, and the stormwater runoff
discharge from the substation (element 4), coal pile (element 5), and
the plant area (element 8) enter the river at node 4. Cooling water
-102-
-------
Cooling water
\\ discharge
Element number
Watershed boundary
Fig. 3-9
Discretization scheme schematic
of land area; Portland, PA.
-103-
-------
Stormwater
drainage system
• 1 \ River mi. 66.75
River flow-297.2m3/$ec(10,500 cfs)
River mi. 66.50 - Field Station 110
¥.3 \ River mi. 66.25 Cooling water withdrawal - 6.18 m3/sec (218 cfs)
Ash handling area direct runoff
•.4 \ River mi. 66.10 - Field Station 120
Cooling water discharge -6.18 m3/sec (218 cfs)
Coal pile and parking lot runoff
River mi. 65.50
* f
•6 I River mi. 65.0
Artificial Dam - elev. 0.0 E
Legend
• Node (Junction)
1 Node (Junction) number
= Channel
| ) Channel number
River mi. 64.5
Fig. 3-10
Discretization scheme schematic
of Delaware River; Portland, PA.
-104-
-------
TABLE 3-23
DISCRETE LAND ELEMENTS
PORTLAND, PA
Element No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Type1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
Width
(Ft)
808.00
0.00
1220.00
1.75
698.00
1.75
3.00
1320.00
1.75
3.00
0.00
Slope
(Ft/Ft)
0.0500
0.0000
0.0080
0.0100
0.0020
0.0169
0.0096
0.0500
0.0100
0.0096
0.0000
AR OR GL2
13.36
0.00
17-48
817.00
11.90
462.00
223.00
10.23
442.00
452.00
0.00
PI OR DF2
50.00
0.00
33.33
1.66
100.00
1.66
2.85
100.00
1.66
2.85
0.00
1Type 1 is a watershed
Type 2 is a pipe or manhole
2AR = Area of watershed (AC); PI = Percent imperviousness (%)
GL - Pipe length (Ft) ; DF = .95 * width
-105-
-------
TABLE 3-24
DISCRETE RIVER ELEMENTS
PORTLAND, PA
Nodes (Junctions)
Junction
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Surface Area
(Sq M)
93861.00
92022.00
74722.00
130490.00
172638.00
71779.00
71779.00
Channels Entering Junction
1
2
3
4
5
5
0
0
1
2
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Channels
Channel
Number
1
2
3
4
5
1
Length
(M)
402.
Width
(M)
233.
402. j 224.
Manning
Coefficient
0.033
Bottom Elev
(M - POS DN)*
-2.8
0.033. -2.7
241. i 245. 0.033 ' -3.4
966. ; 209. 0.033 -3.5
805. 178.
0.033
-1.6
Junctions at Ends
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
(M - POS DN): Measured positive downward from data plane.
-106-
-------
for the power plant is withdrawn at node 3 and is discharged at node 4.
As with the Allegheny River discrete element scheme, an artificial dam,
i.e., a dam with no elevation above the river bottom, was placed between
nodes 6 and 7. Channels connect each of the nodes except where the nodes
are interrupted by the dam. The physical characteristics for the node and
channel element scheme are listed in Table 3-24.
As described in the SSWMM - RECEIV II Model Development Section of
this report, the amount of pollutant washed from the land surface
during a storm is, in part, related to the initial (pre-storm) mass of
pollutant on the land surface. The initial pollutant mass load is equal
to the dust and dirt accumulation rate multiplied by the area of the
watershed with that dust and dirt accumulation rate, the number of dry
days between storms, and the amount of a particular pollutant in the dust
and dirt. The dust and dirt accumulation rate and the amount of a par-
ticular pollutant in the dust and dirt used as inputs for Runs 1, 2, 3,
and 4 were determined from dust sampling programs for both the Warren
and Portland Generating Stations. The area of the watershed with that
dust and dirt accumulation rate and the number of dry days between storms
were determined from discrete element schemes and meteorological records
respect ively.
The results of the dust and dirt sampling and analyses programs
are summarized in Table 3-25. At the Warren Generating Station (Runs
1, 2, and 3), one dust and dirt accumulation rate (.003 Ibs/dry day - ft )
was representative of all the watersheds. At the Portland Station
(Run 4), two dust and dirt accumulation rates were developed—one for
the coal pile, plant, and substation watersheds (.0003 Ibs/dry day - ft2)
-107-
-------
TABLE 3-25
SUMMARY RESULTS OF DUST AND DIRT
SAMPLING PROGRAM AS INPUT TO MODEL
Location
Warren
Generating
Station
Portland
Activity
Entire
Plant
Area
Coal Pile
and Adjacent
Area
Ash
Handling
Area
Dust and Dirt
Accumulating Rate
(Lbs/Dry Day-Ft2)
.0031
.00032
.000552
mg Pollutant Per Gram
of Dust and Dirt
TSS
993.5
997.91
998.39
Sulfates
1.0
-1.11
1.18
Total Fe
18.7
.016
.004
Manganese
.3
.003
.0013
Aluminum
3.4
.015
.0066
TDS
6.5
2.09
1.61
o
oo
I
1The dust and dirt load increased at this accumulation rate without
reaching an ultimate level over a 15-day period.
2The dust and dirt load increased at this accumulation rate for
approximately four days after which the total dust and dirt load
remained at a constant level.
-------
and one for the ash handling watershed (.00055 Ibs/dry day - ft2). The
amount of pollutant in the dust and dirt also varied between the Warren
and Portland Generating Stations. Total suspended solids and sulfate
levels were slightly higher at Portland, while total iron, manganese,
aluminum, and total dissolved solids levels were substantially lower at
Portland.
Storm activity input data consisted of field measurements of rain-
fall intensity. The results are summarized in Table 3-26. The storm
of September 17, 1976 at the Warren Generating Station was used for
model Runs 1 and 2. This storm lasted approximately seven hours and
was described as a steady drizzle with intermittent, short but heavy,
showers. The maximum rainfall intensity was 0.11 inches/hour, and the
cumulative rainfall was 0.33 inches. The storm of August 26, 1976, was
used for model Run 3 at Warren. This storm was a short (20-minute)
shower with a maximum rainfall intensity of 0.33 inches/hour and a cum-
ulative rainfall of 0.11 inches. The storm used for model Run A at Port-
land occurred on October 20, 1976. The storm lasted approximately 14
hours and was described as a steady drizzle with intermittent, short but
heavy showers. The maximum rainfall intensity was 0.16 inches/hour,
and the cumulative rainfall was 1.55 inches.
Another input item of fundamental concern to SSWMM - RECEIV II is
the choice of background flow and pollutant loadings in the receiving
waters. Background conditions are those flow and pollutant loadings
which are not influenced by the stormwater runoff of the particular
site being studied.
-109-
-------
TABLE 3-26
SUMMARY OF STORM ACTIVITY
Location
Warren
Generating
Station
Warren
Generating
Station
Portland
Generating
Station
Date
8-26-76
9-17-76
10-20-76
Name
Storm #1
Storm #2
Storm #1
Storm
Activity
Shower
Steady
Drizzle,
Intermittent
Showers-
Heavy at
Short In-
tervals
Steady
Drizzle,
Intermittent
Showers-
Heavy at
Short In-
tervals
Rainfall
Intensity
(Time)
1435-
1455
0800
0930
1050
1130
1230
1510
0800
0810
0910
1010
1110
1140
1155
to
2130
(in/hr)
0.33
0.00
0.04
0.05
0.11
0.07
0.03
0.00
0.06
0.10
0.05
0.09
0.16
0.16
0.12*
Total
Rainfall
(in)
0.11
0.33
1.55
Comments
Last Prior Storm
Occurred on 8-15-76
Last Prior Storm
Occurred on 10-13-76
o
*Average Intensity Based on Measured Value for Cumulative Rainfall
in that Time Period
-------
In the case of the Warren and Portland Generating Stations, background
conditions were measured in the river upstream of the plant stormwater
discharges. Background flows and pollutant loadings used as input to
model Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4 were computed as a three-day average of the
river field measurements at the upstream station for one day prior to the
storm, the day of the storm, and one day after the storm. The background
conditions were computed in this manner since a model restriction requires
that the background inputs to the model remain unchanged for the model
simulation period. A three-day simulation period was desired to allow
computational stability and to monitor the storm-induced flows and pollu-
tant concentrations for up to one day after the storm. A background river
flow used as input to model Runs 1, 2, and 3 at Warren was 68.66 m /sec,
while the background river flow at Portland for Run 4 was 297.2 m3/sec.
Background pollutant loadings, expressed as concentrations for model Runs
1, 2, 3, and 4 are shown in the tables presented with the model results
in the following subsection.
3.3.3.2 Model Results
The model results from Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4 were compared to field data
V
where comparable information was available and at time intervals where
maximum runoff flows and pollutant loadings occurred in the model. Selected
results were summarized to illustrate the nature of and the impact of
stormwater runoff at the Warren and Portland Generating Stations. The re-
sults of the model and field measurement comparison are presented in Tables
3-27 through 3-31 for Model Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4.
-Ill-
-------
For model Run 1, the initial model run at the Warren Generating
Station, the modeled stormwater runoff flow was 0.4 of the measured flow,
and the modeled stormwater runoff pollutant concentrations were within a
factor of 4; i.«., the model concentration divided by the measured con-
centration varied between .25 and 4.0 for total suspended solids, total
iron, manganese, and aluminum, but were greater than a factor of 4 for
sulfates and total dissolved solids. Flow measurements were not made
at the site in the Allegheny River; hence, modeled and measured river
flows could not be compared. Modeled and measured pollutant concentrations
in the Allegheny River compared within a factor of 3. The results for
Run 1 are shown in Table 3-27.
In model Run 2, the calibration model run at the Warren Generating
Station, the impervious area water retention storage depth was reduced
from .062 inches in Run I to .001 inches in Run 2 to increase the modeled
percentage of the total rainfall that was runoff. This change was made
since the area was almost completely impervious. The percentage of run-
off, therefore, should be approximately equal to 100%, and in Run 1 it
was only 86%. In Run 2 the percentage runoff was 99%. The impervious
area water retention storage was maintained at .001 inches for Runs 3 and 4.
In Run 2 the modeled stormwater runoff flow and pollutant concentra-
tions and the modeled river pollutant concentrations compared to the
field measurements with approximately the same degree of accuracy as with
Run 1. As with Run 1 it was not possible to compare modeled and field
measured flow parameters in the Allegheny River. Run 2 results are shown
in Table 3-28.
-112-
-------
TABLE 3-27
COMPARISON OF MODEL RESULTS TO FIELD DATA
MODEL RUN 1, STORM 2, (INITIAL RUN)
WARREN GENERATING STATION
SSWMM
Flow (CFS)
Pollutant
TSS
S04
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
IDS
Model1
Inlet 3
.26
#/min
6.635
.0325
.607
.010
.110
.211
mg/1
6819
33.4
623.8
10.3
L13.
216.8
Meas1
Sta.
34
.63
mg/1
4028.
2100.
700.
10.4
79.0
3135.
Factor
Model/
Meas
.4
1.7
.02
.9
1.0
1.4
.07
Model2
Inlet 5_
.15
#/min
3.078
.0174
.325
.005
.059
.113
mg/1
3163
31.0
579
8.9
105.1
5.3
Meas2
Sta. 31
32,33
No Data
mg/1
2058 -
5410
225-475.
153-300
3.5-6.0
23.5-71.
357-618
Factor
Model/
Meas
-
1.5-.6
.1-.06
3.8-1.9
2.5-1.5
4.5-1.5
.Ol-.OOf
Model3
Inlet 8
.12
#/min
2.434
.0213
.398
.006
.072
.138
mg/1
5420
5.7
886.
13.4
160.3
307.3
Meas3
Sta.
42
No Data
mg/1
2695.
3000.
1025.
16.0
111.0
5456.
Factor
Model/
Meas
-
2.0
.002
.9
.8
1.4
.06
1 Time - Model = 1130; Meas = 1110 - 1120
2 Time - Model = 1115; Meas = 1100 - 1115
3 Time - Model - 1030; Meas = 1020
RECEIV7
Quality
Pollutant
TSS
SO 1+
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
TDS
Max. Cone.1*
(mg/1)
13.536
16.174
.355
.033
1.030
105.228
Junction
6
6
6
6
6
6
Background
(mg/1)
11.610
16.170
.190
.030
l.OOO6
105.198
Measurement5
Sta. 20
(mg/1)
4.5
16.0
.74
.06
l.OOO5
99.00
Factor
Model/Meas
3.0
1.0
.5
.6
1.0
1.1
^ Time - 1200
5 Time - 1150 - 1210
6 1.000 - Non-Detectable Limit.
^ Quantity - Storm has no effect on flow characteristics*
-113-
-------
TABLE 3-28
COMPARISON OF MODEL RESULTS TO FIELD DATA
MODEL RUN 2, STORM 2, (CALIBRATION RUN)
WARREN GENERATING STATION
SSW1M
Flow (CFS)
Pollutant
TSS
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
TDS
Model1
Inlet 3
.26
0/min
6.501
.0263
.493
.008
.090
.171
mg/1
6681
27.0
506. (
8.2
92.5
175.:
Meas1
Sta.
.68
mg/1
4028.
2100
700
10.4
79.0
3135
Factor
Model/
Meas
.4
-
1.6
.01
.7
.8
1.2
.06
Model2
Inlet _5_
.15
///rnin
3.01
.0141
.263
.004
.048
.091
mg/1
5362.
25.1
468.5
7.1
85.5
162.1
Meas2
Sta. 31,
32.33
No Data
mg/1
2058 -
22^75.
153-300
3.5-6.0
23.5-71.
357-618
Factor
Model/
Meas
-
2.6-1.0
.1-.05
3.1-1.6
2.0-1.2
3.6-1.2
.4-. 3
Model3
Inlet 8
.13
#/min
2.754
.0191
.358
.006
.065
.124
mg/1
5660
39.2
736.
12.3
133.6
255.
Meas3
Sta.
42
No Data
mg/1
2695.
3000.
1025.
16.0
111.0
5456.
Factor
Model/
Meas
-
2.1
.01
.7
.8
.8
.05
1 Time - Model = 1130; Meas = 1110 - 1120
2 Time - Model = 1115; Meas - 1100 - 1115
3 Time - Model - 1030; Meas = 1020
RECEIV7
Quality
Pollutant
TSS
SO^
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
TDS
Max. COnc.1*
(mg/1)
13.496
16.173
.324
.032
1.024
105.217
Junction
6
6
6
6
6
6
Background
(mg/1)
11.610
16.170
.190
.030
l.OOO6
105.198
Measurement'
Sta. 20
(mg/1)
4.5
16.0
.74
.06
l.OOO6
99.00
Factor
Model/Meas
3.0
1.0
.4
.5
1.0
1-1
Time • 1200)
5 Time » 1150 - 1210
6 1.000 " Non-Detectable Limit.
7 Quantity - Storm has no effect on flow characteristics.
-114-
-------
For model Run 3, the verification model run at the Warren Generating
Station, the modeled stormwater pollutant concentrations also compared to
the field measurements with approximately the same degree of accuracy as
did Run 1. No measured stormwater flow data were available to compare to
the modeled flow results. Again, it was not possible to compare modeled
flow to measured flow in the Allegheny River since such measurements were
not made in the river. Modeled and measured pollutant concentrations in
the Allegheny River compared within a factor of 4. The results for
Run 3 are shown in Table 3-29.
For model Run 4, the initial model run at the Portland Generating
Station, it was not possible to compare modeled and measured stormwater
runoff flow since no field data were available on stormwater flow.
Modeled stormwater pollutant concentrations were different from field
measurements by greater than a factor of 4. As with the Warren site,
it was not possible to compare modeled and measured river flows since
river flow was not measured at the site. Modeled and measured pollutant
concentrations in the Delaware River compared within a factor of 5.
Results for Run 4 are shown in Tables 3-30 and 3-31.
The model was not calibrated at Portland because stormwater flow
field measurements were not available, and it is first necessary to cali-
brate flow in the model before any other model adjustments are warranted.
Selected model results illustrating the nature of and the impact of
stormwater runoff from model Runs 1, 2, 3, and 4 at the Warren and Port-
land Generating Stations are listed in Tables 3-32, 3-33, 3-34, and 3-35.
-115-
-------
TABLE 3-29
COMPARISON OF MODEL RESULTS TO FIELD DATA
MODEL RUN 3, STORM 1, (VERIFICATION)
WARREN GENERATING STATION
SSWMM
Flow (CFS)
Pollutant
TSS
SOi*
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
TDS
Model1
Inlet _3_
l/mln
mg/1
Meas1
Sta.
34_
Ho Data
- '•••^•••IH^MHW^
mg/1
No Data
.
Factor
Model/
Meas
MH^HHW^MVOIHIWV^
Model2
Inlet _5_
.2
#/min
1.939
.0143
.267
.004
.049
.093
.1
mv rim ••••^••••••g
mg/1
2467.
18.2
340.
5.1
62.3
118.
Meas2
Sta. 31
32.33
No Data
^— ^*^*MW««HH^^^M
mg/1
1027 -
2965.
1750 -
108-700
9.6-45.
42.5-334
2405 -
8107.
Factor
Model/
Meas
••PVM^MH^HHMMa^M^
2. 4-. 83
01-. 002
3.1-.4J
.53-.!
1.5-.2
.05-. 01
Mode
Inle
•^•••^••iwav-WHtv-
#/min
I3
t 8
1 II ••!•!• 1 i
mg/1
Meas3
Sta.
42
to Data
•BIMM^I*I*^^^WM
mg/1
No Data
Factor
Model/
Meas
•—•»—••„
1 Time
2 Time
3 Time
No Data During Storm
1445
No Data During Storm.
RECEIV'
Quality
Pollutant
TSS
S04
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
TDS
Max. Cone.1*
(mg/1)
7.839
12.481
.249
.030
1.003
114.502
Junction
6
6
6
6
6
6
Background
(mg/1)
7.73
12.48
.23
.030
l.OOO6
114.5
Measurement5
Sta. 20
(mg/1)
No Data
No Data
.06
.013
l.OOO5
No Data
Factor
Model/Meas
_
-
4.2
2.3
1.0
-
** Time - 1600
5 Time = 1550 - 1650
6 1.000 " Non-Detectable limit,
7 Quantity - Storm has no effect on flow characteristics.
-116-
-------
TABLE 3-30
COMPARISON OF MODEL RESULTS TO FIELD DATA
MODEL RUN 4, STORM 1,
PORTLAND GENERATING STATION
SSWMM
Flow (CFS)
Pollutant
TSS
S04
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
IDS
Model1
Inlet 2
.83
#/min
.543
.0037
<.001
<.001
<.001
.005
iag/1
175.
1.2
•<.32
<.32
<.32
1.6
Measure1
Station
131, 132
No Data
rag/1
2344-10932
1200-1600
73-245
.03-2.5
125-138
1843-2504
Factor
Model/
Measure
-
.07-. 02
.001-. 0008
.004-. 001
10. -.13
.002-. 002
.0008-. 0006
Model2
Inlet 11
2.34
#/min
1.015
.0058
<.001
<.001
<.001
.011
mg/1
116.
.7
<.l
<.l
<.l
1.2
Meas2
Sta.
134B
1o Data
mg/1
280.
400.
385.
1.75
50.
698.
Factor
Model/
Meas
-
.4
.002
.0002
.06
.002
.002
1 Time
2 Time
1115
1045
RECEIVJ
Quality
Pollutant
TSS
SO^
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
IDS
Max. Cone.1*
(mg/1)
16.070
14.611
.570
.050
1.000
67.455
Junction
4
4
4
4
4
4
Background
(mg/1)
15.999
14.618
.570
.050
l.OOO6
67.486
Measurement^
Sta. 120
(mg/1)
7.1
9.0
.45
.01
l.OOO6
45.7
Factor
Model/Meas
2.3
1.6
1.3
5.0
1.0
1.5
3 Quantity - Storm has little effect on flow characteristics in river
(Less than .05% increase in river flow at max. storm discharge).
•» Time - 1200
5 Time - 1130 - 1200 and 1230 - 1300
6 1.000 - Non-Detectable Limit.
-117-
-------
TABLE 3-31
COMPARISON OF MODEL RESULTS TO FIELD DATA
MODEL RUN 4, STORM 1,
PORTLAND GENERATING STATION
oo
I
SSWMM
Flow (CFS)
Pollutant
TSS
50^
Tot.Fe
Mn
Al
TDS
Model1
Inlet 2
.81
#/min
.590
. 0018
<.001
<.001
<.001
.002
mg/1
195
.6
<.3
<.3
<.3
.6
Measure1
Station
131. 132
No Data
iag/1
13124-15213
1100-1300
148-300
.04-. 25
100-200
1631-2015
Factor
Model/
Measure
-
.01-. 01
.0005-. 0004
.002-. 001
7.5-1.2
.003-. 0015
.0004-. 0003
Model2
Inlet 11
3.38
#/min
1.60
.0027
<.001
<.001
<.001
.005
rag/1
126.
.213
<.08
<.08
<.08
.4
Meas 2
Sta.
134B
No Data
mg/1
516.
200.
280.
1.60
31.3
o Data
Factor
Model/
Meas
-
.25
.0002
.0003
.05
.002
-
1 Time = 1415
2 Time = Model = 1345; Meas = 1340
-------
TABLE 3-32
SELECTED RESULTS FROM MODEL RUNS
RUN 1, STORM 2 (INITIAL RUN)
WARREN GENERATING STATION
LOCATION*
INLET 3
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 5
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 8
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
SSWMM
MAXIMUM
FLOW RATE
(cfs)
'.26
.20
.26
1
TOTAL
RUNOFF
cu ft
7514 "
For
inlets
J.5,8
*•
PERCENT 0V
RAINFALL THAT
IS RUNOFF
(Z)
86
For inlets
[3.5,8
••• ^£
POLLUTANT
LOAD ON LAND
SURFACE PRIOR
TO STORM
(LUS)
7350.2
7.4
138.3
2.2
25.2
48.1
4815.6
4.8
90.6
1.4
16.5
31.5
7124.9
7.2
134.1
2.2
24.4
46.6
MAXIMUM
STORM
MSHOFF RATE
(f.BS/MTN)
8.037
.0332
.621
.010
.113
.216
5.835
.0234
.438
.007
.080
.152
8.012
.0330
.616
.010
.112
.214
TOTAL
STORM
POLLUTANT
WASUOFF
(LBS)
1031.8
5.5
103.4
1.7
18.8
36.0
691.0
3.6
67.8
1.1
12.3
23.6
1006.6
5.4
100.3
1.6
18.2
' 34.9
PERCENT
WASHOFF
(%)
14
75
75
75
75
75
14
75
75
75
75
75
14
' 75
75
75
75
75
RECE;/ (COMBINED EFFECT OF ALL INLETS)
MAXIMUM
POLLUTANT
CONCENTRATION
IN RIVER
(MC/L)
LOCATION
OF MAX.
RIVER CONG.
(JUNCTION
NO)
CONCENTRATION
PRIOR TO
STORM
'(BACKGROUND)
(MG/L)
Flow not changed by storm
13.89
16.17
.366
.033
1.032
105.2
5
ALL
5
5
5
ALL
11.61
16.17
.190
.030
1.000
105.2
CHANGE IN CONCENTRATION
DUE TO STORM
(MAX CONC -
BACKGROUND CONC)
MG/L
2.28
0.0
.176
.003
.032
0.0
% CHANCE
+20.0
0.0
+93.0
+10.0
+ 3.0
0.0
*Inlet 3 drains coal pile area.
Inlet 5 drains area between the plant and the river (direct runoff area).
Inlet 8 drains area adjacent to plant.
-------
TABLE 3-33
SELECTED RESULTS FROM MODEL RUNS
RUN 2, STORM 2 (CALIBRATION RUN)
WARREN GENERATING STATION
LOCATION*
INLET 3
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 5
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 8
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
SSWMM
MAXIMUM
FLOW RATE
(cfs)
'.26
.20
.26
'
TOTAL
RUNOFF
cu ft
"8652"!
For
inlets
3,5, 8|
PERCENT OF
RAINFALL THAT
IS RUNOFF
(%)
99 I
For inlets
3, 5, 8
L 4
POLLUTANT
LOAD ON LAND
SURFACE PRIOR
TO STORM
(LBS)
7350.2
7.4
138.3
2.2
25.2
48.1
4815.6
4.8
90.6
1.4
16.5
31.5
7124.9
7.2
134.1
2.2
24.4
46.6
MAXIMUM
STORM
WASHOFF RATE
(LBS/MIN)
7.857
.0269
.503
.008
.091
• 175
5.706
.0190
.355
.006
.065
.123
-
7.834
.0267
.499
.008
.091
.174
TOTAL
STORM
POLLUTANT
WASHOFF
(LBS)
1173.0
5.9
110.1
1.8
20.0
38.3
782.3
3.8
72.1
1.2
13.1
25.1
1142.2
5.7
106.5
1.7
19.4
37.0
PERCENT
WASHOFF
(%)
16
80
80
80
80
80
16
80
80
80
80
80
16
80
80
80
80
80
RECEIV (COMBINED EFFECT OF ALL INLETS)
MAXIMUM
POLLUTANT
CONCENTRATION
IN RIVER
(MG/L)
LOCATION
OF MAX.
RIVER CONC.
(JUNCTION
NO)
CONCENTRATION
PRIOR TO
STORM
(BACKGROUND)
(MG/L)
Flow not changed by storm
13.84
16.17
.333
.032
1.026
105.2
5
ALL
5
5
5
ALL
,11.61
16.17
.190
.030
1.000
105.2
CHANGE IN CONCENTRATION
DUE TO STORM
(MAX CONC -
BACKGROUND CONC)
MG/L
'
2.23
0.0
.002
.026
0.0
% CHANGE
+19.0
0.0
+75 0
*^ 9 J 9 V
+ 7.0
+ 3.0
0.0
O
I
*Inlet 3 drains coal pile area.
Inlet 5 drains area between the plant and the river (direct runoff area)
Inlet 8 drains area adjacent to plant.
-------
TABLE 3-34
SELECTED RESULTS FROM MODEL RUNS
RUN 3, STORM 1 (CALIBRATION)
WARREN GENERATING STATION
LOCATION*
INLET 3
Flow
TSS
Sul fates -
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 5
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 8
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
SSWMM
MAXIMUM
FLOW RATE
(cfs)
.26
.27
.28
TOTAL
RUNOFF
cu ft
1225."
For
inlets
3,5,8
-
PERCENT OF
RAINFALL THAT
IS RUNOFF
(%)
f 92 1
1 For inlets!
3, 5, 8
L J
-
POLLUTANT
LOAD ON LAND
SURFACE PRIOR
TO STORM
(LBS)
3925.3
4.0
73.9
1.2
13.4
25.7
2572.0
2.6
48.4
.8
8.8
16.8
3805.0
3.8
71.6
1.1
13.0
24.9
MAXIMUM
STORM
•IASHOFF RATE
(LBS /MIS)
4.765
.0276
.517
.008
.094
.180
7.048
.0277
.517
.008
.094
.180
5.214
.0290
.542
.009
.099
.188
TOTAL
STORM
POLLUTANT
WASHOFF.
(LBS)
100.6
.8
14.5
.2
2.6
5.0
-
107.8
.5
10.1
.2
1.8
3.5
107.9
.8
14.2
.2
2.6
5.0
PERCENT
WASUOFF
(%)
3
20
20
20
20
20
3
20
20
20
20
20
3
' 20
20
20
20
20
RECEIV (COMBINED EFFECT OF ALL INLETS)
MAXIMUM
POLLUTANT
CONCENTRATION
IN RIVER
(MG/L)
LOCATION
OF MAX.
RIVER CONC.
(JUNCTION
NO)
CONCENTRATION
PRIOR TO
STORM
(BACKGROUND)
(MG/L)
Flow not changed by storm
9.32
12.48
. .383
.032
1.028
114.5
•
5
ALL
5
5
5
ALL
7.73
12.48
.230
.030
1.000
114.5
CHANGE IN CONCENTRATION
DUE TO STORM
(MAX CONC -
BACKGROUND CONC)
MG/L
1.59
0.0
.153
.002
.028
0.0
% CHANGE
+20.0
0.0
+66.0
+ 7.0
+ 3.0
0.0
I
I-1
NJ
*Inlet 3 drains coal pile area
Inlet 5 drains area between the plant and the river (direct runoff area).
Inlet 8 drains area adjacent to plant.
-------
TABLE 3-35
SELECTED RESULTS FROM MODEL RUNS**
RUN 4, STORM 1
PORTLAND GENERATING STATION
LOCATION*
INLET 2
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
INLET 11
Flow
TSS
Sulfates
Total Fe
Manganese
Aluminum
TDS
SSWMM
MAXIMUM
FLOW RATE
(cfs)
r.o?
3.94
TOTAL
RUNOFF
cu ft
189820
For
inlets
[2, 11
PERCENT OF
RAINFALL THAT
IS RUNOFF
(%)
65
For inlets
2, 11
L J
POLLUTANT
LOAD ON LAND
SURFACE PRIOR
TO STORM
(LBS)
1277.1
1.5
.005
.002
.008
2.0
2064.3
2.3
.03
.006
.03
4.3
MAXIMUM
STORM
WASIIOFF RATE
(LBS/MIN)
.911
.0046
< .001
< .001
< .001
.006
2.356
.0071
< .001
< .001
< .001
.013
TOTAL
STORM
POLLUTANT
WASIIOFF
(LBS)
418.0
1.46
.005
.002
.008
1.99
983.7
2.19
.03
.006
.03
4.13
PERCENT
WASIIOFF
(%)
33
* 100
•v 100
* 100
A, 100
•v. 100
48
•b 100
•*. 100
•v 100
•v 100
•v 100
RECEIV (COMBINED EFFECT OF ALL INLETS)
MAX I MUM
POLLUTANT
CONCENTRATION
IN RIVER
(MG/L)
LOCATION
OF MAX.
RIVER CONG.
(JUNCTION
NO)
CONCENTRATION
PRIOR TO
STORM
(BACKGROUND)
(MG/L)
CHANGE IN CONCENTRATION
DUE TO STORM
(MAX CONC -
BACKGROUND CONC)
MG/L
Less than .05% change in river flow due to storm
16.07
14.61
.570
.050
1.000
67.45
4,5,6
4,5,6
ALL
ALL
ALL
4,5,6
16.00
14.62
.570
.050
1.000
67.49
+ .07
- .01
0.0
0.0
0.0
- .04
% CHANGE
+ .4
- .07
0.0
0.0
0.0
- .06
I
M
N3
I
*Inlet 2 drains ash pile and ash handling area. Inlet 11 drains coal pile and area adjacent to plant.
**Results are questionable as there were insufficient data to calibrate model at Portland.
-------
In model Run 1, the initial model run at Warren, the total storm-
water runoff was 7514 ft3 which was 86% of the total rainfall. This run-
off did not change flow conditions in the Allegheny River. Based on the
components of the accumulated dust and dirt, only 14% of the pre-storm mass
of total suspended solids was washed from the land surface during the storm.
However, 75% of the pre-storm mass of sulfates, total iron, manganese,
aluminum, and total dissolved solids was washed from the surface. Model
Run 1 showed maximum pollutant concentrations increased in the river by 20%
for suspended solids, by 93% for total iron, by 10% for manganese and by 3%
for aluminum. These values are within the confidence limits of the means
except for iron. The model shows a definite increase in iron for the
second storm. The field data, however, does not show a significant in-
crease in iron concentration. This difference is probably due to either a
poor field sample or poor sample timing (i.e., the peak concentration was
missed). Concentrations of sulfates and total dissolved solids remained
unchanged as a result of the stormwater runoff. Selected results for Run 1
are shown in Table 3-32.
In model Run 2, the calibrated model run at Warren, the total storm-
water runoff was 8,652 ft3 which was 99% of the total rainfall. Flow
characteristics in the Allegheny River remained unchanged. Sixteen per-
cent of the pre-storm mass of total suspended solids and 80% of the pre-
storm mass of sulfates, total iron, manganese, aluminum, and total
dissolved solids were washed from the land surface during the storm, and
maximum pollutant concentrations increased in the river for total sus-
pended solids by 19%, total iron by 75%, manganese by 7%, and aluminum
by 3%. Concentrations of sulfates and total dissolved solids remained
-123-
-------
unchanged as a result of the stormwater runoff. Selected Run 2 results
are shown in Table 3-33.
For Run 3, the storm of August 26, 1976 at Warren, the total storm-
water runoff was 1,225 ft3, which was 92% of the total rainfall. Flow
characteristics in the Allegheny River were not changed by this storm
flow. Three percent of the pre-storm mass of total suspended solids and
20% of the pre-storm mass of sulfates, total iron, manganese, aluminum,
and total dissolved solids were washed from the land surface during the
storm, and maximum pollutant concentrations increased in the river for
total suspended solids by 20%, total iron by 66%, manganese by 7%, and
aluminum by 3%. Concentrations of sulfates and total dissolved solids re-
mained unchanged as a result of the stormwater runoff. Selected results
for Run 3 are shown in Table 3-34.
In Run 4, the storm of October 20, 1976 at Portland, the total
stormwater runoff was 189,820 ft3, which was 65% of the total rainfall.
Flow in the Delaware River increased by less than 0.05% as a result of
the stormwater runoff. Thirty-three percent of the pre-storm mass of
total suspended solids and approximately 100% of the pre-storm mass of
sulfates, total iron, manganese, aluminum, and total dissolved solids
were washed from the land surface during the storm. The concentrations
of total suspended solids, sulfates, total iron, manganese, aluminum,
and total dissolved solids in the Delaware River were not changed by
the stormwater runoff. The results of model Run 4, however, are ques-
tionable as there were insufficient field data to calibrate the model
at the Portland Generating Station and as the field data that did exist
did not compare favorably to the modeled results. The results of Run 4
are listed in Table 3-35.
-124-
-------
3.3.4 Results of the Model Development Program
From the work completed in this study, it appears that SSWMM -
RECEIV II is capable of predicting the quantity and quality of storm-
water runoff and its impact on receiving waters for specific industries,
but that model limitations do exist. These limitations include the lack
of capability to simulate storm erosion of infinite sources, i.e., material
storage piles, and to simulate stormwater percolation through material
storage piles.
SSWMM - RECEIV II is a versatile stormwater and receiving water model
suited for industrial application. It is inherently flexible so that it
is applicable to each of the industries identified in Section 3.1.1 of this
report, with only minor data input modifications.
Specific utility industry application described in this study has
demonstrated that, for the most part, where adequate field data were
available, SSWMM - RECEIV II results compared favorably to field measure-
ments. At the Warren Generating Station calibrated model results for
stormwater runoff flow and pollutant concentrations (total suspended
solids, total iron, manganese, and aluminum) compared within a factor of
4 and river pollutant concentrations for all six pollutants within a
factor of 3 to field measurements. Most importantly, the model-field
measurement comparative factor of 4 was maintained for a second storm at
Warren, indicating that the calibrated model could predict the effects
of different storm conditions with the same degree of accuracy established
in model calibration. In essence, the model was verified, increasing model
credibility and indicating the feasibility of its use for industrial ap-
plications.
-125-
-------
Several difficulties were encountered in this model study. Modeled
stormwater runoff concentrations of total dissolved solids and sulfates
at the Warren Generating Station were different from the field-measured
values by greater than a factor of 4. Adequate field data were not availa-
ble to ascertain the comparative validity of the model at the Portland
Generating Station for either stormwater runoff or the receiving water.
Although difficulties were encountered, SSWMM - RECEIV II was dem-
onstrated to be a valid stormwater runoff and receiving water model suited
to industrial application. Additional work is needed to increase model
credibility and usefulness, and recommendations to that end were presented
in Section 2.0.
-126-
-------
References
1, Staff Report. National Commission on Water Duality (Washington. B.C..
April 1976).
2- Report to the Congress, National Commission on Water Quality (Wash-
ington, D.C., April 1976).
3. Donald M. Gray, Editor-in-Chief, Handbook on the Principles of Hydrology.
(Port Washington, N.Y.: Water Information Center and National Research
Council of Canada, 1970).
4. Martin P. Wanielista, Nonpoint Source Effects. Florida State Department
of Environmental Regulation, Florida Technological University Report
// ESEI-76-1 (January 1976).
5- National Water Quality Inventory-1975 Report to Congress, U.S. Envir-
onmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Planning and Standards
(Washington, D.C.).
6. N. Sridharan and G. F. Lee, "Phosphorus Studies in Lower Green Bay,
Lake Michigan," Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation
(April 1974).
7. John A. Lager and William A. Smith, Urban Stonawater Management and
Technology - An Assessment (Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, December 1974).
8. Methods for Identifying and Evaluating the Nature and Extent of Non-
Point Sources of Pollutants (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air and Water Programs, EPA-430/9-73^-014,
October 1973).
9. Phillip E. Shelley and George A. Kirkpatrick, An Assessment of Automatic
Sewer Flow Samplers - 1975 (Cincinnati, Ohio: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, December 1975).
10. Plugs were designed and built by Kahl Scientific Instrument Corp., P.O.
Box 1166, El Cajon, California 92022.
11. W. G. Hines, e_t al., Formulation and Use of Practical Models for River -
Quality Assessment (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, Circular
715-B, 1975).
12. Development Document for Effluent Guidelines and New Source Performance
Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category
(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Effluent
Guidelines Division, EPA-440/l-74-029-a, 1974).
-127-
-------
13. 1975 Keystone Coal Industry Manual (New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill, Inc.,
1975).
14. Short Stormwater Management Model Documentation Report, University City
Science Center (Philadelphia, PA: unpublished, June 1976)
15. New England River Basins Modeling Project Final Report, Volume III -
Documentation Report, Part I - RECEIV II Water Quantity and Quality
Model, Raytheon Company (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, EPA Contract No. 68-01-1890, December 1974).
16. Huber, Wayne, Heaney, James, Medina, Maguil, Peltz, W., Sheikh, Hagan
and Smith, George, University of Florida, "Storm Water Management
Model, User's Manual, Version II," Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development, National Environmental Research
Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA-670/2-75-017, March 1975.
17. Short Stormwater Management Model Documentation Report.
18. New England River Basins Modeling Project Final Report.
19. C. V. Beckers, et a^., "RECEIV-II, A Generalized Dynamic Planning
Model for Water Quality Management," Proceedings of the Conference
on Environmental Modeling and Simulation, April 19-22, 1976 (Cincin-
nati, Ohio; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 600/9-76-016,
July 1976).
20. New England River Basins Modeling Project Final Report.
21. Proceedings of the Conference on Environmental Modeling and Simulation.
-128-
-------
APPENDIX A
STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF FIELD DATA
A-l Warren
A-2 Portland
A-3 Summary of 60% to 95% Confidence Levels
-129-
-------
TABLE A-l
STATISTICAL EVALUATION
WARREN DATA
No. of
Case
DRY,
TSS
soi+
Fe
Mn
Alk
DRY,
TSS
so.'
k
Fe
Mn
Alk
WET,
TSS
SOtf
Fe
Mn
Alk
WET,
TSS
SO,
LL
Fe
Mn
Alk
Data Ele
DOWNSTREAM
15
18
19
19
24
UPSTREAM
37
28
35
34
43
DOWNSTREAM
8
10
9
8
10
UPSTREAM
10
11
10
12
9
Arith _
Mean , x
mg/1
Std
Dev
S
Coef .
of Var
X
Variance
*2
4.13
13.83
0.21
0.023
39.33
3.69
2.92
0.18
0.011
2.10
0.89
0.21
0.86
0.46
0.05
13.56
8.50
0.034
0.0001
4.41
8.11
13.89
0.23
0.028
41.65
6.77
2.17
0.067
0.014
2.76
0.83
0.16
0.28
0.50
0.07
45.77
4.69
0.004
0.0002
7.61
5.50
16.65
0.39
0.043
40.30
3.24
3.15
0.35
0.014
0.48
0.59
0.19
0.91
0.327
0.01
10.50
9.89
0.123
0.0002
0.23
7.25
15.09
0.12
0.032
40.33
4.44
1.39
0.04
0.004
1.22
0.61
0.09
0.29
0.138
0.03
19.74
1.94
0.0013
0.00002
1.50
-130-
-------
TABLE A-2
STATISTICAL EVALUATION
PORTLAND DATA
No. of
Case Data Elements
Arith
Mean, x
mg/1
Std
Dev
S
Coef.
of Var
S
Variance
DRY, DOWNSTREAM
TSS
SOtt
Fe
Mn
Alk
DRY,
TSS
SO 4
Fe
Mn
Alk
WET,
TSS
SOif
Fe
Mn1
Alk
WET,
TSS
SQii
Fe
Mn
Alk
16
20
21
21
17
UPSTREAM
13
17
18
17
14
UPSTREAM
5
5
6
6
5
DOWNSTREAM
8
13
12
12
8
11.66
10.10
0.56
0.055
15.59
13.07
2.34
0.40
0.045
2.45
1.12
0.23
0.72
0.81
0.16
170.8
5.48
0.16
0.002
6.00
12.72
12.86
0.56
0.051
16.07
8.04
2.54
0.44
0.035
3.15
0.63
0.198
0.79
0.68
0.196
64.64
6.47
0.194
0.001
9.92
13.54
14.25
0.30
0.020
17.6
4.76
4.93
0.11
0.011
1.14
0.35
0.35
0.36
0.56
0.06
22.64
24.34
0.01
0.0001
1.30
7.39
8.15
0.43
0.016
16.38
2.64
2.17
0.34
0.010
0.52
0.36
0.27
0.79
0.64
0.03
6.95
4.72
0.11
0.0001
0.27
*0ne non-detected value:
Two non-detected values:
0.009
0.0045, 0.009
NOTE: None detected data were replaced with a linear progression of values
between 0 and this limit of detection for each pollutant
Al = 0.2 mg/1, Mn = 0.009 ing/1, Fe = 0.05 mg/1
-131-
-------
TABLE A-3
SUMMARY OF STATISTICAL EVALUATION (T - TEST)
OF WARREN AND PORTLAND DATA AT
60% AND 95% CONFIDENCE LEVELS
Warren
TSS
SOi^
Fe
Mn
Alk
DD-UD
60% 95%
Yes No
No No
No No
Yes No
Yes No
DD-DW
60% , 95%
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes Marg
Yes No
UD-UW
60% 95%
No No
Yes No
Yes Yes
Yes No
Yes No
UW-DW
60% 952
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
No No
Portland
TSS
SO^
Fe
Mn
Alk
No No
Yes No
No No
No No
No No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
No No
Yes No
No No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
No No
No No
Yes No
Key
DD = Downstream, Dry
DW = Downstream, Wet
UW = Upstream, Wet
UD = Upstream, Dry
MARG = Marginal
Hypothesis:
The means of sample sets A (XA) and B (i
are different within confidence limits ol
60% and 95%.
-132-
-------
APPENDIX B
SSWMM - RECEIV II PROGRAM LISTING
-133-
-------
* * * *
PROGRAM SSWMM
COMMON /TIT/ TITLEC2H)
COMMON /GENRL/ T IME , U ME 2 ,DELT ,T ZERO , AREA 199 ) ,NOS ,NSTEP , TARE A ,DELT
12,MQUAL
COMMON /DIRT/ PSHED I 99 ,8 I ,PB ASIN 199, 8 1
COMMON /DDATA/ XF ACT ( 8 ,6 > , OXFACT 18 ) » C6FAC1 (8 ) tDR YDAY
COMMON XOSH12/ FPSX , TO TDD C99 ) ,F1 18 ) , F2C8 I .CBVOL, BASINS I 99 » ,FLWLST I
199) ,ISS
COMMON /WSHD/ "WlSTO ,W5 ,W6 ,DEC AY ,WLMIN ,WLMAX ,UST ORE! 3) ,SUMR ,SUMI ,
1SUMST
COMMON /SUUSG/ EFLOWC99) ,E*IDTH« 99 1 , SLOPE 199 I .DEPTH I 99,3 I , PCIMP( 99
1>,NRG<99)
COMMON XGUGQL/ NUP<9 9 I ,IUPI99 ,3 I ,NCH AH 199 I ,66 tSUMOFF
COMMON /QUAL/ TLOAD0,8»
COMMON /GOLUS/ PCTZER.RA IN II , 1 00 I , IS AVE C 5D > , NS AVE*NELT, JOUT
COMMON /TFILE/ I NLET S , ISFI I 20 I ,F LSV i 20 I ,PS AVEf 20 ,81
DIMENSION Cf99,8I,DFULLC991tGLEN«99> , Q IN ( 99 > r V « 9 9 I ,POFF ( 99 ,8 I ,QSUR
1(99»
CQUI VALENCE: ( PSHED d >,CCIH, IIOTDDII » .QIUII » » » IBASINSID ,vci D
EQUIVALENCE (PCIMPC1 I ,DFULL C 1 » J , CPBA SIN I U .POFFI II)
CQUI VALENCE I ARE At U ,GLEN(1> ),(FLWLST(1) ,USURU» )
CALL REA01N
C INITIALIZES MATRICES AND NECESSARY VARIABLES TO ZERO
00 <»5 KT = 1,NELT
EFLOWIKT JZQ.O
QSUR(KTI=O.Q
DO «*0 J=l,3
«0 DEPTHfKT, JI=U.O
t«5 CONTINUE
00 70 LL=1,NELT
DO b'J MM=1,NQS
PSHEDCLL,MMJ=C.O
60 P8ASIN(LL,MMlza.O
70 CONTINUE
SUMR=0.0
SUMOFFrG.D
SUMST-D.O
I-l
IF(MOUALI 500,S01,50.J
500 CALL GSHED1
SOI DO ^HC? IJ-l.NSTEP
1-1*1
TIME-TIMrl+OELT
TIME2=TIME-DELT2
^RITEC6,1D01 > FlTLCfTIME
Ol FOaMATClHl///f10Xt20A«l,///8Xt 'SUMMARY OF QUANTITY AND QUALITY RESU
1LTS FOR TIME', F10.0/ 8X, 'QUANTITY - FLOW IN CU FT/SEC'/ TRC CHN&
2 eX, 'QUALITY - POLLUTANT LOADINGS IN LB/MIN; COLIFORMS*. TRC NEy
3 ' (IF MODELED) IN MPN/MIN*// TRC NEW
2 10X, 'ELEMENf, 5X, *FLOy*, 19X, 'TSS't 6X , 'SULFATES', TRC NEW
3 «X, 'TOTAL Ft', MX, 'MANGANESE*, MX, 'ALUMINUM*, 7X, *TDS*TRC NEW
t< //} TRC NEW
CALL WSHEDflll
IFIMOUALI
-134-
-------
* * *
350 CALL QSHLD2UM
M20 CALL GUTTER(III
CALL GvJIJALCIl)
ItO CONTIMJE
SET IDWF^C IF 0«Y WEATHE* FLOU IS NOT TO bF. MODELED
«EADI5,inci IDWF
IF (IDWF.tC.U > GO T.) Hbi)
CALL DRVWF
<*5Q CONTINUE
100 FORMATCI2I
STOP
tND
-135-
-------
* * *
SUBROUTINE QSHED1
COMMON /DIRT/ PSHEDI99,8»,P6ASIN 199,81
COMMON /DOATA/ XFACT t 8 »8 » ,OXF ACT ( 8 ) , CliFACT ( 8 ) , OK YDAY
FPSX, TO TDD (99 I ,F1 (6I,F2(8) ,CB VOL ,B ASI MSI 99 I .FLWLSTI
COMMON /OSH12/
199), ISS
COMMON /GUGQL/
COMMON /GQLWS/
NUP I 9 9> , IUP I 99 ,3 ) ,NCHAR < 99 I ,G6 ,SUMOFF
PCI ZE R ,R AIN C<« , 1UO I , IS A VE t SO I ,NSAVE tNELT t JOUT
DIMENSION XLANDI8»,GQLENI8),ZZZ<99,19)
C THIS SUBROUTINE INITIALIZES ALL POLLUTANT LOADINGS
DO 10 KT=1,NELT
IF(NCHARCKT)-l) 10,9,10
9 00=0.0
C READ SPECIFIC QUALITY DATA
READ (5, IOC) BASINS(KT) ,RCFF, CLFREC
10Q FORMATU5X,UF1U.O)
C XLANDCIJ CAN BE DESIGNATED AS ANY 8 ARBITRARILY CHOSEN LAND USES,
C DUST AND DIRT LOADING RATES AND POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS WITHIN A
C GRAM OF OUST AND DIRT FOR THESE LAND USES, HOWEVERf MUST BE
C POSITIONED IN THE RIGHT LOCATION OF THE NEEDED VECTORS.
C
READ(5,1Q2) ( XLAND ( I 1 , 1= 1 , 8 J
MEAD 15,1021 «GQLEN( I>, 1=1,8 >
1C2 FORMAT (8F10.51
ZZZtKT ,1 )=3ASINS (KTJ
ZZZ(KT,2>=REFF
DO 199 K?rlf8
199
C
c
C
C
C
C
c
C
130
?10
230
ZZZIKT ,Ka JrGQLCN (KZ)
URY=ORYDAY
IF (DRYD^Y.LT.CLFREO) GO TO 130
TGS=l.fJ
NCLEAN=DWYOAY/CLFREQ
UO 200 J=1,N CLEAN
TGS=TGS* (1.0-RLFr )**J
THE FOLLOWING DO LOOP COMPUTES A
«ATE AVERAGE: BASCD 0'4 * LAND USE
LOADING RATE FOR EACH LAND USE
UO 210 1=1,8
00=00 + OX FACT (I J*XL*NDt IJ*GQLEN(I )
CALCULATE THE DUMBER OF GRAMS OF DUST A^O
1b3.6 IS A CONVERSION FACTOR tGRAMS/Lb>
WtlGHfEU DUST AND DIRT LOADING
AND THE PARTICULAR DUST AND DIRT
DIRT ON THE -IATERSHEO
LOOIJ COMPUTES
ANO DIRTJ FOR
LANO USCS
DO 220 K-1,6
THE FOLLOWING ~/0
IMG POLL./G DUST
AVERAGE OVER ALL
DO 230 L=l,8
PSHEDIKT ,K J=PSH£i)«KT ,K ) + XFACT( L , K ) *X L AND ( L )
CALCULATE THfc TOTAL AMOUNT OF EACH POLLUTANT IMG» ON THE
PSHEDCKT ,K >=PSHEl)IKT,K»*DD
CALCULATE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF EACH POLLUTANT IMG I IN THE
A POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION
EACH POLLUTANT BASED ON A WEIGHTED
WATERSHED
-136-
-------
* * * *
C CATC Mb AS INS
220 t'BASiNCK ! ,K ) =C.JVOL*P AS INS (XT J*Ct-FAC! U
TOTDOJKT J-PSHE J(KT,.? )
WRITE(6, 1C11 KT,l)0,< PSHEUU1 ,K > , K = 1 , 8 1 , (PBASIMK f ,K J ,K-l,b)
10 CGN11NUL
•JHITH6, Ibb)
IDS FUWMAT cihi,» SUB» ,c>x ,»CBASINS» ,bx, •KLFF* ,5x,'CLFREQ*,39x,f LAND u
lSEf/^8X,•l•,6Xf•2',9X,t51f9X,•t',9Xft5f,9X,•6',9X,•7•,9X,•8•/) IRC CHNG
00 S02 13=1,NELT
IF(NCHAR(13).E3.2I GO TO 532
WRITE 16,106) I3»(Z2Z(I3,IZitIZ=ltl9i
502 CONTINUE
inb FORMAT t/,13J 3X,Ii',Fl i.l ,Fia.2 ,F 1 0 .1 ,«»X ,8F1U. 2/HOX »8F 10 .2/H
101 FORMAT /,5X ,»ON W AT LR SHED ' , 1 X , I 2 , IX , " fHERII ARC ' ,1PE ID. «4 , IX f * GRAM
IS OF DUST AND 01»T.f,//,1SX,•THE MG CONTENT OF EACH CONSTITUENT ON
2THIS WATERSHED I S» , / , 1 r»X , 8 (1 PE ID .1 ,2 X I f // , 1 5 X, • THE MG CONTENT OF E
3ACH CONSTITUENT IN THE CATCHBASINS FOR THIS WATERSHED IS »,/,15X»8
t(lPElD.tt,2XM
RETURN
LND
-137-
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE REAJIN
COMMON /TIT/ TITLE(2'J>
COMMON /bENRL/ T 1ME , TJ ME 2 ,UEL 1 , T ZERO , ARE A t 99 ) ,NQS ,NS TLP» TARE A , OELT
12,MOUAL
COMMON /DIRT/ PSHED ( 99 ,8 > ,PBASI N I 99 , b 1
COMMON /ODATA/ XF ACT t 8 ,8 ) ,DXFACT (8 > , C6FACT( 8 ) ,UR YDAY
COMMON /QSH12/ FPSX,fOTOD(99),Fl(«),F2(8) ,CB VOLtBASI NSI 991 ,FLWLST<
199) ,ISS
COMMON /WSHD/ NH1 STO ,W 5, Wb ,DEC AY ,WLM IN ,WLM AX ,WSTORE ( 3» ,SUMR , SUHI ,
1SUMST
COMMON /GUWSG/ EFLOW t 99 > ,E«ID1H ( 99 ) , SLOPE 199 I , DEPTH! 99,3 I ,PC IMP ( 99
1 ) ,NRG(99)
COMMON /GUSQL/ NUP C 9 V I , I UPC99 , 1 1 ,NCHAR (99 I , 66 .SUMOFF
COMMON /GOLWS/ PCTZE R ,«A IN< a , 100 I , IS AV£ C 50 ) , NSAVE ,NELT , JOUT
COMMON /TFILE/ INLCT -J, ISFI (20 I ,F LSV t 20 » ,PS AVE 1 20 , 6 »
DIMENSION C(99t8J,OFULL(99>,GLEN(99» ,QIN(99! ,V<99»
EQUIVALENCE I PSHED < 1 » » C ( 1 ) I . ( 1 OTDD ( i ) tQINf 1 II
CQUI VALENCE I PC IMP Cl > ,DF IJLL C 111 , (B AS INS ( 1 1 ,V ( 111
tOUIVALENCE ( ARE A 1} I ,GLEN( 1 ) )
C THIS SUBROUTINE READS AND INITIALIZES ALL GENERAL DATA NECESSARY
C FOR THE REMAINING PARTS OF THIS PROGRAM
READ C5,1DQ» JOUT
KEAD 15, 1005 J TITLE
IF
-------
* * * *
UO *Q KT-1,NCLT
READ (5,1 «*r.) lELT,KiCHARCKr»,MJP,NRGIHn
IF (NRG IK I >„£ w..l. ANO.NCHA'JtKT I . CQ .1 > NK>HKM-1
IF(NCHAR(KT).EJ.^J GO TO 15
READ 15,150) F.4IOTHIKT ), AREA «K T ) ,PCIMPIK D .SLOPE (KT)
WRITE16, 1G5C ) IELT,NCHAR(KT),NUP(KT),IIUP(KT,NM) ,N^=1 ,5),NRG(KT),E
1,4IDTHIKT),SLOPC(KT),AREA(KT),PC1MP(KT>
TARE ArTAREA* Af»L"A (KT)
C CONVERT AREA TO SQUARE FEET
AREA(KTJrAREA(KT1*15560.
60 TO 20
15 READ(5,155> Efci IDTHCKTI,GLENIKT),SLOPEiKT)
UFULL(KT)-0.95*EWIDTH(KT
yRITEC6,1050) IELT,NCHAR
H«IDTH(KT),SLOPE-WSTOHE( U/l2.
CONVERT INFILTRATION! RATCS TO FEET/SECQNO
HEAD GENES AL QUALITY DATA
IF (MQUAL.FQ.O) GO fO Jl
RLAD (5,1 7L) CPi/OL,NO S, I SS, OR YD AY
WRITE (6, 175) Ci)«OL,NiJS,ISS,nKYDA Y
RLAD{5,1»5) (C'HFACTI I) , I~ltNgS)
WKlTt <6,19H) , ICBFACT (1 I , I=1,NQS>
KLADI5 ,lc*5) (L'XFACT { T | ,1-1 ,6)
WhlTfllb,iVO) IDXFACT ( I ) ,1-1 , til
JO 30 '1-1, 8
READ (5 ,1 3D) I XFA CT f M , J ) , J-l , i>tU 3 »
30 WklTE(6, I9U) (XFACTf Mt J> ,J-1 ,NQS )
KLAU' b,ld!i) (F KL1 ,L -•! ,NQS)
WHITE Cfc, I97i) CF1 (L)«L = 1,^US1
KLADC5.135) (F>(L > ,L-1 ,N«S>
JK I T E I 6 , 1 9H ) ( F
-------
* * *
1HRINTEO OUT FOrf 6 CONSTITUENTS.',/,5X ,'THESE CONSTITUENTS, IN ORDETRC CHNG
2«, ARE •/ 23X, '2 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOL10SV TRC NEW
3 2UX, »3 SULFATES'/ 20X, "» TOTAL IRON'/ TRC NEW
*» JGX, 'S MANGANESE'/ 20X, '6 ALUMINUM'/ TRC NEW
5 20X, '7 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS') TRC NEW
IDG HOHMATtIZ)
1005 FORMAT I20A<4»
110 FORMAT IUI2,2F5.U.JI2J
115 FORMAT
-------
* * * *
SUbROUTINL GQUAH1I)
REAL *L
COMMON /GENRL/ TIME, HME2,i)F.Ll ,T?LRG , AREA (99 ) ,NQS,NSTEP,TArtEAfUELT
l«i,MUUAL
COMMON XfiUGQt/ NUP<9 9 ) , IUP 19V , 3) , NCH At, (99 ) ,66 , SUMGFF
COMMON /QSH12/ FPSX,10TnDC99),Fl(8),Ft(8),CBVOL,BASINS(99),FLWLST(
199>,JSS
COMMON /WSHD/ NH 1 STO , W 5, W6 ,DEC AY ,WLM IN , WLM AX ,KSTORE ( 3 > ,SUMR, SU1I ,
IbUMST
COMMON /GUWSG/ E FLOW 199) ,ErfIOTH«99 > , SLOPE (99 J , DEPTH! 99, 3 » ,PC IMP (99
1 > ,NRG(99)
COMMON /GCLtfS/ PCTZE R ,RA IN (<» , 100 J , IS A WE I 50 ) , NS AVE ,NELT , JOUT
COMMON /DIRT/ PSMED( 9.9 ,8 ) ,PB AS IN ( 9 9, 6 )
COMMON /TFILt/ INLET S , ISFI ( 20 I ,F LSV ( 2U » ,PS AVE t20 ,8 I
COMMON /OUAL/ rLOAl)(^D,8)
DIMtNSIOM C(99,8 >,[)F ULLt99l,GLCN (9V) ,QIN(99I , V (99 I , 0 SU» ( 99 ) , POFT C 9
19,3)
EQUIVALENCE < PSHF.D ( 1 ) , C ( 1 ) I , ( 1 OT 00 ( 1 ) , 01 N ( 1 ) I , ( B A SINS ( 1 ) ,V ( 1 I )
LUUI VALENCt (Pc)ASlN( i) ,POFF (1) ) , (FLWLSK 1) ,OSUR( 1))
tuUIVALENCE (PCIMPJ 1 ) ,DFULL(1 ) )
EUUIVALENCr: (Ar^EAIl) ,GLEN(1 ) )
DIMENSION FLUX(8) ,ML t8>
C THIS SUBROUTINE CALCULATES POLLUTANT MASS LOADS AND POLLUTANT
C CONCENTRATIONS IN ALL PIPES AND fHEl LAST MANHOLE
DO 420 KT-l.NELT
IF(NCHAR (KT)-2 ) 12Q,9,<42T
9 IF (EFLOW (KT) .GF. .DH5 J GO TO 150
OG 13C Kri.NCS
130 C I K T * K ) = 0 . '.)
GO TO 295
ISO DO £ DC K-l
UO 240
IK (NCHAR (K V.Efc.l ) 50 10 23"3
C ADD UPSTREAM PIPE CONCEN FR AT IONS TO FLUX
DO ?20 M=I,NQS
2?G FLUX (M )=FLUX (K>*C«K, i1)*EFLOW (K )
GO TO 240
C ADD UPSTREAM POLLUTANT WASHOKFS FkOh WATEKSHEP TO FLUX
2?Q UO 235 K-1,NOS
235 FLUX (H) -FLUX (Ml+HOFF (KT,M) 12 8.31 7
210 CONTINUE
UO 1 Ili MNrl ,ISNL£TS
IF(K r.ME .ISFI «HN» GO TO 170
DO 171 K=J,NQS
1T4 C(KT »K )=FLUX C'K )/J".FLOy(KT )
GO TO 295
170 CONTINUE
C COMPUTE PCLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS FOR PIPES AND MANHOLE
C(KT,K) = (FLUX(K>*DrLT-»CV{KT)-(giN(KT)-fFLG»JIKT) ) *CCL T+QSUR (K
rtT ,K I )/ (CFLO*'(i
-------
* * * *
90LO FORMAT (//,* **** GUTTER',13,' SURCHARGED, SURCHARGE' = •,F10.0v' CU
1H, FLOW - '.FA.!,' CFSV)
295 DO 3UO N-UNSAVE
IF CKT.EQ.ISAVE
C SUH ALL FLOWS FROM THE LAST PIPE ELEMENT
298 SUMOFF^SUMOFF +HFLOI41 MP )*DELT
C CALCULATE ONLY 3 POLLUTANT MASS LOADS THAT MAY BE SAVED FOR
C STORAGE ON FILE
DO 1 IPL=1»NQS
1 PSAV£(MN,IPL»=HL,((PSAVEIHN*I
1 PL>,£PL=l(NQS!ffMN = ltINLETS)
IF III.NfT.NSTEP) GO TO 111
C COMPUTE PERCENTAGE ERROR FOR UNACCOUNTED «ATER
ER«OR=(SUKKf-SUHI-SUMOFF-SUMSTI*10Q./SUMR
WRITEI6,«?DOO > SUMR,SUMIf SUMOFF ,SUKST tERROR
JRITfc<6,5000)
00 75 1 = 1,INLETS
75 WkITEt6,3tJ05) ISFI (I ) , ( TLOAD (1 , I T ) , I T = l , NOS)
C100Q KOHMAT<12X,I2,5X,F7.2flX,F10.3,2X,F10.3,'»X,EID.'» , 5f 2X VF1 0. 3 ) / )
nOQ FORMAT C12X, I 2 fSX ,F 7. 2 , 1 X ,F 10 .3 ,2X, Fl 0.3 ,««X , F 1 O.«l ,5 t2X »F1U. 3)/) TRC CHNG
2000 FO*MATUHlf///2X, 'TOTAL RAINFALL ( CU F T) ' , 5X ,E 12 .6,// ,2X , • TO TAL IN
1FILTRAT10N «CU FT)*,5X»E12.6,//,2X,•TOTAL GUTTER FLOW CCU FT)*f5X»
2E12.6,//,2X,'TOTAL SURFACE STORAGE I CU F T )% 5X,E 1 2.6 ,//,2X ,« ERROR
3 IN CONTINUITY • ,5X,FI0.5)
3101) FORMAT (///// 15X, 'THE TOTAL POLLUTANT LOADS FOR EACH INLET ARE AS F
10LLGWS:'/ 15X, »POLLUTANf LOADS IN LB; COLIFORMS tIF MODELED) IN'.TRC CHNG
2 f MPNV// 10X, 'ELEMENT*, 19X, fTSS», 6X, TRC NEW
3 'SULFATES'r *» X, 'TOTAL FE ', MX, 'MANGANESE*, 5X, TRC NEW
<4 *ALUMINUH', 7Xf *TDS*//) TRC NEW
C30C5 FOMhATC12XfI2t^X,2(2X,F10.3lt<»XtEIO.«»f5<2XfF10.31//»
300S FG^KAT (12X,I2,2X ,2 ( 2 X t Fl'J. 3 ) ,«*X, F 1 Q.M ,5( 2X ,F IP . 3 I//) TRC CMNG
111 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
-142-
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE. CShtUZt II »
COMMON /GENF-L/ T IMC , T I >1E f , I)E L T t T ,!C *0 , A'?L A < >9 ) ,.JQS ,\'S TEf> , T ARE A , OEL T
12.MQUAL
COMMON /OlttT/ PSHEDO9 ,6 ) .PBASIN (S9,8 »
COMMON /QSH12/ F PS X , I C TDO < 99 ) , F 1 < 8 ) , F2 ( 8 ) ,CB VOL , 3 A SI NS ( 99 ) , F LWLS T (
199), ISS
COMMON /GUWSb/ EFLOW ( V9 ) , EWI 1)1 H ( 99 J , bL CPU 99 ) .QEPIH ( 99, 3 ) ,PC IMP I 99
1), NRG I 99)
COMMON /GUGOL/ NUP( 9 9 I , I UP ( 99 , 3 ) ,NCHAfx f 99 1 ,G6 , SUMOFF
COMMON /GOLWSA PCTZE P , RA IN < <4 , 1 [JO ),1SAVL«SO) , NS4VC ,NEL T , JOU T
OIMLNSION PMU31 ,POFR99,8I
fcUUI VALENCE (P3ASIM( 1) ,POFF< 1) )
C THIS SUBROUTINE COMPUTES WATERSHED QUALITY CONTRIBUTIONS
UTM1N=DELT/60.
IF(TIMt.EC.TZERO*Di:LT
IF (CC.LT.D.2S> CC=0.25
00 10 KT=lfNCLT
IFINCHAR(KT)-! ) 10,9,10
COMPUTE AVERAGE FLOW
9 IF (TIME.EC.TZEHO+DELT) FLWLS f (KT )z£FLOW « KT )
L,KT=KT*1
AVFLOW-(FLWLST(KT )+EFLOWCKT))/2.Q
FLWLST(KT )=EFLOW (KT )
COMPUTE RUNOFF RATCS IN IM/HR
IF(AREA(KT).GT.O.DOI ) RUN 1-12. 0*AVFLOW/ARLA 0-1.0
IF (E.GT. 30a. ) t-300.
20H DFACT::1.0-fXP(-FPSX**UNl*DEL
.8
1MAVAIL1.GT .1 .)
IF (AVAIL2.GT.1 .) AVAIL2-1. 0
COMPUTE MATERIAL DECAYED AtfD KATERIAL REMAINING ON THE WATERSHED
DO 21L J-1,NUS
IF (J.EQ.2.AND.1SS.CQ .1) GO TO 2Urj
AV^l .
IF(J.E'J.1> AVrAVAILl
IF(J.EQ.2) AV-AVAIL2
i^OFF (LKT,J»-AV*PSHED (KT, J)*DFftCT
GO TO 206
2C5 J>GFr*CC*PSHED(HT , J ) /TO TDD{ KT
1 )
2Db IFtPOFF(LKT,J».GT .PSHEDIKT, JU POFF CLkT , J > =PSH£D ( KT , J J
PSHtO(KT,J)=PSH£n(KT , J ) -POFF ( LK T , J »
2U POFF (LnT,J» = POrFtLKT ,J)/OELT*H1J)*POFF(LKT,1 >+F2ICF.NIRftTrON OF WATCR IN THE CATCHBASINS
-------
* * * *
IF ICRVOL.GT . 1 .JE-5.AND.BASINSIKT J.GT .1.QE-15» RATE=< AYFLOW*DELT1 /I
DF ACT^l.O-LXPl-
C COMPUTE CATCHbASINi CONTRIBUTION
UO 220 J-l.NQS
IF(PbASIN(KT,J).LT.l.E-50> PBASlN»KT,J» = 0.f)
PPrPbASINtKT,J)*OFACT
PbASIK(KT,JI=PdASIN(KT , J)-PP
22 U POFF ILKT , J) = POFF «LKT , J ) *PP/DEL T
DO 2 L-l ,NSAVE
IF(KT-ISAVE(LI)2f 1 »2
1 DO *» IP=1,NOS
1 PML(IP) = POFF ILKT,IP»x-..OOai322
PMH 3J=PML(3 J*60.
yRITEI6,1000 1 KT .EFLOWCKT J ,PML
2 CONTINUE
C1QOO FORMATJ12X,I2,5X,F7.2,lX,F10.3,2X,F10.3,«»XfElC.'»,5l2X,FlD.3J/l
1000 FORMAT(12X,I2,SXfF7.2,lXfF10.3f2XfFin.3,«tXfF10.<»,5C2XtFlD.3}/l TRC CHNG
10 CONTINUE
MLTURN
END
-144-
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE WSHLDUU
COIN' OK /StNRL/ TIME, II ME 2 ,DE L T ,T £E ,*0 , AUt A ( 99 ) ,>JQ S ,NS TEP , TAHE A ,QELT
12,MCUAL
COMMONi/WSHO/NHISTO,w:,,W6,lJECAY,WLMIN,WLMAX,WSTOREm , SUMR , SUMI , SUM
1ST
COMMON /G«LWS/ PCTZE, K , RA IN ( i» f 1UO ) , J S AVE ( 5D ) ,NSAVE »NEL T , JOUT
COMMON /GUWSG/ EFLOW (99) ,E UI 01 HI 99 ) , SLOPL f 99 ) , DEPTH! 99 , J I ,PC IMP ( 99
1),NRG(99I
COMMON /GUGQL/ NUP 199 » ,IUP (99, 3 I ,NCHAR I 99 > ,G6 ,5UMOFF
C THIS SUBROUTINE COMPUTES QUALITY DATA FOM A WATEWSHEO
C SET HI - THE RAINFALL INTENSITY FOR THE CURRENT TIME INTERVAL
C IF THE TIKESTEP > THJ LAST RAINFALL INTERVAL SET WI=0
UO 320 KT31.NELT
IF (NCHARIKT)-l ) 320,9,321)
9 HI-0.0
IF (II-NHISTO»5,5,6
5 L-NRG(KTI
RI=RAIN(L,1I )
6 EFLOW1KTI-0.0
DELR=D.Q
C THE FOLLOWING MAJOR DO LOOP COMPUTES 3 INSTANTANEOUS WATER DEPTHS
C AND A FLOW FOR THE ENTIRE WATERSHED BASED ON THESE 3 DEPTHS
C THESE 3 DEPTHS ARE CALCULATED FOR
c i ..... IMPERVIOUS AREA OF WATERSHED WITHOUT IMMEDIATE RUNOFF
C 2 ..... PERVIOUS AREA OF WATERSHED WITH INFILTRATION LOSS
C 3... ..IMPERVIOUS AREA OF WATERSHED WITH IMMEDIATE RUNOFF
DC 315 K-1,3
JFIK-2J 101,2C»V;13
201 WARcQ.U
IFIPCTZEW.LT.lJQ.D)WAR=AWEA«KTI*PCfMP4KT»/lOQOO.*llOD»-PCTZE»»
202 WCOhirC.Q
C CALCULATE A MODIFIED MANNING'S EQUATION
lF) *E» * t 100. -PCIHP ( KTI >/100.
CALCULATE A MODIFIED KANNIMG'S EQUATION
IF(PCIMPIHT).LT.1DO. > WCOM--C 1 .186/W6 )*SO«T (SLOPE )
GO TO 215
21!3 WAR- ARC A CK T > *PCIHP
CALCULATE A NE .4 DEPTH IF ANY WATER REMAINS ON THE SURFACE AFTER
INFILTRATION
IF J IRI-RLOSSI*UELT+DEPTH(KT,KI.GT.O. ItO 10 22t
«LOSS=«1+LEPTHCKT,K l/DLLT
JLPTHCKTfK)=O.J
WFLO-O.G
GO TO 310
1)0 .vOT CALCULAfL FLOW IF NEW R AI NF ALL*OLU 'JEP"»H< STORAGE
-145-
-------
* * * *
2213 1F< U?l-RLOSS)*JE.LT+DLPTHCKT,K>.LC.WSTliHE(K IIGO TO 285
C THE FOLLOWING INNEW 00 LOOP CALCULATES A FLOW USING THE
C NEWTON-RAPHSOK TECHNIQUE
JO 260 1=1,11
00=0 EP TH (KT,K»-K STORE « KI*.5*DLLR
IF «Ca.LT.O.)OD-0.
F-OCLR-DELT* tWCON*DO**1.6666667« IRI-RLOSS) )
DF= 1. -DE LT*( 0.33 3333 33 *WCON*DO**. 666 6667)
OLL=OELR-F/OF
IF(I .EQ.1160 TO 2«fO
1F< » ABSlGO TO 280
WRITE 16, 10aO)TIH£,KT,DEPTHfHTtKl ,DELR
1000 FORMAT«2X,*CHECK RESULTS , NO CONVERGENCE IN *WSHED* • ,F8 .0 , I 6,2E 12
1.5)
280 DCOR»-DEPTHi*U,K 1+OEL
WF LO = ( RI -RLO SS >* WftR-(D CO RR -DEPTH (KT ,K II *WAR/DELT
IF(WFLO.GT.O. tiiO TO 29U
285 yFLO=0.
JCORR=DEPTHIKT,Kl-*fRI-RLOSS)*DELT
290 UEPTHfKT ,K)rDCORR
C SUH FOR TOTAL RAINFALL AND INFILTRATION
310 SUMR=SUHR-»RI#OC:LT*«AR
SU!1I=SUMI+RLOSS*DELT*WAR
LF LO W I K T ) -EF LO*J t H T 1 * WFLO
315 CONTINUE
IF ( II.NE.NSTEPIGO TO 320
IFCPCTZER.NE.l JO. J 7E HOCK r PEP Th( KT , I »*ARE A iKT ) *PC IMP (K T 1 /1000Q.*( 10
1Q.-PCT2ER>
SUM FOR SURFACE STORAGE
SUMSTrSUMST*ZE.^OCK*DCPTH(KT,2l*( 10Q. -PCI «P (K T l> / 1DO,
320 CONTINUE
RLTURNi
-146-
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE GUTTEMII )
CO IK OK / JlMRL/ T IKl t U ,4E ? ,f)EL T , T 2EKO., A«L A f>9 1 »NQ S ,NS TEP , TAME A , 1ELT
12, 1C UAL
COMMON /OSH12A FPSX, T0ro:)<99» fFHrf ) , F2 <8> , CD VCL, BASl NS I 99 » ,FLWLST t
I9v», iss
COMMON /6UGQL/ NUM 9 S» I „ Ulp t 99, 3 ) ,N'CH AM 99 > tG6 .SUMOFF
COMMON /GUWSG/ E.FLOW 199 I ,E WI 01 H t 99 » , SLOPE t 99 I ,OE P1HC 99 ,3 I ,PC IMP! 99
1 >,MfcG<99-)
COMMON /GOLWS/ PC1ZER,RAIN<1 ,100 > , IS A VE < bU I ,NS AVE ,N£LT , JOUT
COMMON /TFILE/ INLET Sv ISF1 (20) ,F LSV(2(J> ,PSAVE t2Q «£)
DIMENSION OFULL(99),GLEN (9?) ,QIN<99J , V (99 > , Q SUR < 99 )
EwUI VALENCE (PCI HP 11 J.OF'JLLI 1 J » , < ARL A 1 1 I ,GLE N 1 1>)
EQUIVALENCE ( TOT DD ( 1 > ,Q1 t4t 1 M , CB AS IN S( 1 ) , V ( 1 11 , i FLWL ST 1 1 ) , QSUR ( 1 J )
C THIS SUBROUTINE COMPUTES QUANTITY DATA FHOH PIPES
DO <*OC KTrlfNELT
IF**2./1. »* (DQ-.5*S IN ( 2 .*DO ) »
IF < AXa.LT.f). )6Xu-D.
IF (WPO.LE.i). JWPU-.'JQl
WAOC-AXO/WPD
iiCON = ll.«»e6/G6>*iC»T (SLOPE(KTI )
FLOWjrGCOfc*C AX J** 1 .6 66G66 7 J / ( WPO**(J . 6666666? I
C THIS HAJOR DO LOOP COMPUTES A FLOW ANL A DCPTH USING THE
C NLWTON-RAPHSON TCCHNIOUE
'JO 3faC 1-1,30
!)I=DEPTH(KT , 1»*CEL3
IF(I.GT.1)30 TO 31 T
01=1 .5707963
UELO-DI-DEPTHUT ,1)
3P7 IF « 01. GT. D.I GO TO 303
DI-C.
8 IMDI.LE .DFULL (KTDGO TO 310
DI~DFULL«KT)
JLLD-D1-:)EPTHUT,1 )
0 iDELV
1 J )
-147-
-------
* * * *
AXl->
OA<1=
IF (AXI .LT.Q. IAX1-C.
IFIWP1.LE.Q. IWP1=.OU1
RA01CAX1/WP1
FLOW1=GCON*1 AX1«*1.66666671/IWP1**Q.66666667>
KLOW = .S*(FLOWD*FLOW1 )
DFLOUl = .5*GCOK'*t 1 .6666667* fR ADI**. 66666667 J*D AX 1 -.66666667*1 R ADI**
11.6666667I*DUP1>
F=OELV*DELT*CFLOW-QINtKT» I-QSURGO TO 320
DLL-. 01
GO TO 3HQ
320 OEL=OELO-F/OF
310 IFd.EQ.llGO TO 360
IF (DEPTHtKT, 1 »*DEL.LT.DFULLfKT) ISO TO 355
IFdFLG.EC.l 1GO TO 390
OEL^DFULLIKT I -DEPTH ( KT , 1 I
1FLG=1
GO TO 360
355 IFLC^O
C CHECK TO SEE IF GUTTER CONVERGED
IFUBSCFJ ,LT .0.1 »GO TG 380
360 UELD^DEL
WRITCr6,lCOO»TIME,KTrDEPT4(KT,l» ,DELO
iUOO FORMAT(2X, 'CHECK RESULTS , NO CONVERGENCE IN *GUTTER* •,F8.0, 16 ,ZE1
12.51
360 OELO-OeL
OEL-U.O
t CALCULATE ME * DEPTH
DtPTHIKT tllrOEPTHfKT , 1 )-»OELD
JSUR
-------
* * * *
SU8KOUT1NL ORY-JF
COMMON /TIT/ TITLl'CMJJ
COMMON /GL MRL/ TIHC, I I IE 2 ,9 | ,;>|Q S ,^S TEP , TArtL A.3ELT
12.HUUAL
COMMON /6QLWS/ PCT^E R ,RA IN { «• . , 1 JO » , I S A Vt ( 50 ) , NSAVE ,NEL T , JOUT
COMMON /TFILE/ 1NLE T S , ISFI ( 2 J I ,F LSV 1 21 > ,PSA VE « ^0 tfi )
JIMENSION ODJFI««,2«»)
c IHIS SUBROUTINE; COMPUTES DRY WEATHER FLOW
C liOD.SUS SOLt AND COLIFORHS ARE THE MAJUR CONSTITUENTS INVOLVED IN
C DKY WEATHER FLOW
C HOWEVER, ANY 3 POLLUTANTS HAY 8E CHOSEN JUST BY SWITCHING
C THEIR POSITION IN THE NEEDED VECTORS TO EITHER 2,3, OR a.
C rfEAD DWY taEATHLR KLOJ AND POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION FACTORS
READ , J-l ,2<4 I
C JOUT=INPUT FILE
C JOUTT-OUTPUT FILE
HEAD(JOUT1 TITLE
JOUTT-JOUT*!
WRITEtJOUTTl TITLE
READ 1JOUTI ^TIM,NfNPUr, NPOLL , JT IM , TZERO
WRITE( JOUTT) NTIH,«aiNPUTf NPOLL tDTIM,Ti:EkO
10TIM-(T2ERO/360a. )+ l.Q
READ(JOUT> NOUT
WRITEtJOUTT) NOUJ
C READ FLOW AND POLLUTANT :4ASS LOADS CALCULATED DURING WET WEATHER
DO 210 I=1,NTM
READ (JOUT J DTH,RUMOHF , POL LI ,POLL2 , POLL 3
C .003 /«4-COKVERS10N FACTOR ( LB S/M&*L /F T3*SEC/H IN J
TDWFrDWF*.UL137'«
C ADO URY WEATHER FLOW TO WET WEATHER FLOW
RUNOFF :RUNOFr-»L)«F*L)D WF(1 ,IUTIM )
C CALCULATE POLLUTANT HAiS LOADS FROM Dfc Y WEATHER FLOW A>40 ADD TO
C UET WEATHER MASS LOADS
PULL1-POLL l + CBJO*DUWr ( 2, IDT IH > *T OWF
COLLZ-POLL^+CSS^aUWF ( 3 , ID'f IM ) *TD WF
POLL 3 -POLL 3 + CC JLI*HDWF («4 , IDT IM)*TDWF
WRITL COMblMED FLOW ANO TOTAL MASS LOADS FrfO* DRY AND WET WEATHER
COUDITIONS
WRITEIJOUTT) UfH, RUNOFF ,P3LL 1 ,P OLL2 , POLL 3
210 *kITEI6,lQ2> DTIM,9UWOFF,POLL1,POLL2 ,P'JLL3
IP 1 l-OtfMATCflFia.SJ
1C2 FORMAT (5X,5( 1P£1 l.;M J
RETURN
CND
-149-
-------
* * * *
PROGRAM LNKPRG
U1HENSION TITLk_<20>, PTLEJ22)
DIMENSION TPOLC20,8»,PSA»/E(20,8)fTFLOI20>fFLSVC2a)fPPRT(lllfNPINt2
!U,d» ,NPOT»2G,6),NPOLLC20) ,ISFI<20>
DIMENSION ZERDC121 TRC NEW
DIMENSION SAPSUQI, FLOUUI, APSP(10,11I TRC NEW
DATA ZERO/12*0.0/ TRC NEW
C TRC NEW
C NOPS NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCES TRC NEW
C TFIN FINAL INPUT AT END OF RECEIV = LAST TIME STEP TRC NEW
C APSP ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCE MASS LOADINGS TRC NEW
C TRC NEW
•IRITE(6,2C01
C ........ READ SSYMM OUTPUT FILE
HEAD(5,10C» IFL.IFO
C ..... ...READ FROM FILL" GENERAL STORM AND BASIN INFORMATION
REWIND IFC
REWIND IFL
REAO(IFL) TITLE
-rfRITEte.HOJ TITLE
WE AD I IFL » NSTEP,INLETS,NPFIf SDEL T,SZERO , TARE A
HE AD < IFL > (I SFK I I, I -I, INLETS)
C, ...... .INITIALIZE TIME TO SSWMM START TIME AND COMPUTE
C... ....... THE HOUR ANO MINUTES OF T IME IN I TI ALIZA T ION
TIME-SZERO
IHRrSZERO/3600.
IMN-CSZERG-FLQ4T (I MR >* 361.10. »/60.
E(6,153) IMLrTS,NSTEP,IHR*IMN
C. ....... READ RECE1V TIMING INFORMATION
READ<5,iio RZLRO,^DI:LT,ISDY
WRITE C6fbOOO> RZERO, SDELTt ISDY TRC NEW
IF (ISDY. NE. 01 TADD = 86^GO. TRC CHNG
C ........ IF SSWMM START TIME BEGINS ON THE DAY AFTER RECEIV START TIMEt
C. ........ .SET TADD=364UO. 186100 SEC=2*» HOURS)
1 MkiTE(6»173)
C» .. .. ...READ THE If OF POLLUTANTS PASSED AND 1-0 ARRAY POSITIONING
C ......... .FROM SSWMM TO RECEIV
WEAD(5,12U) (NPOLLfl I * I- i , INLE FS )
DO 3 1-1 .IVLETS
READ{5,12D) (NfPIN 1 1 ,K > ,K -1 , J )
*EAD(S,12G» (NPOTII,K1 ,K=i,J»
WRITEI6,160J IvJvINPIN(ZfK >»K=1, JJ
3 yRITEt6,lb5» CMPOTCI ,K 1 ,K=1 ,J»
C INITIALIZE TIML-STEP RECORD COUNTER TO 0
HtiL - 1 TRC CHNG
C
HtAD tStlUOl NOPS, 1-FIN TRC CHNG
THR - O.U
WRITE <6,18m THR, PTLC
LIU *4SL I-1, NOPS
F^L4D (5,13i>) NAPS1I), FLOII), I APSP (I , J I , J=l , 11 > TRC NEW
-150-
-------
* * * *
19
C
C
C
30
20
18
rfHITFfb, »U3>
«mTE (IKJ)
IF (KbCL r.(,T
WRITE tIFOI
jo IB INOE
KfcADIlFL ) TI
1, INLETS)
THR = (TIME+
WRITE (6, HOC
UO IB 1=1,
UO 19 N-1,
PPRT (N) =0.
FSUM - FLSV(
NPWT = NPOL
DO 24 J-lt
K - NPIN(I,J
L = NPOT U,J
IF (K.NE.3)
PPRTtL) = PS
GO TO 2D
PPRTU) - PS
CONTINUE
NAPStl >, FLOU >, » APSP
Ki'JL , THR, Ni>(l),
.SUELT ) GO TO 17
M.JL, 2EHOU), MQL
X-UNSTEP
ME, IFLSV «MN),MN = 1 ,INLETS
T AOU)/56JU.
) TIME.PTLE
INLETS
11
0
IJ*D.U28 317
I)
tl,JI ,J=1 ,1 1 )
FLOdl, UPS P ( I , J » , J -1 , 1 1 1
, < ZiIkO< I > ,1 - 1 , 1 2 1
),( (P&AVF. IMNfN),N =
WRITEIIFO)
GO TO 15
>
)
GO TO 30
AVEl 1,31*1 ,666C-Ofi
AVE(I,K)*75S9.37
1,FSUM,
THE # OF RECEIV TIME-ST
TA*T-UP TIME
T ADD-f
-------
* * *
5
C,
C,
C,
C,
C,
333
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
16
55
C,
C,
C,
*
TPOL(I ,K I=TP
KT-K T*l
bO TO 22
....CALCULATE
NTSW=RDELT/S
....PASS TO C
......AND POL
OTHEKWI
.TIMF.-ST
OVER LA
IF(ICNT) 222
00 <* 1 = 1,1NL
TFLGII1=0.0
DO «< J=l ,fc
T'POLCI ,JI=0.
....FLOWS AND
MANY TI
AT THE
....FLOWS AND
OVER TH
DO 55 IT=1,N
READUFL) TI
1 .INLETS)
DO 6 1=1,IML
TFLOCI»=TFLO
NPWT=NPOLL(I
DO 6 J=l,fcPW
TPOL(I,K)=TP
KT=KT+1
....CHECK FOR
IF(KT-NSTLP)
CONTINUE
GO TO 222
....IF THC LA
SAME TI
......TIME-ST
TDIFF=(TIME+
NTDF=TOIFF
FDIFF=TDIFF-
IFJFDIFFI 13
OLU VK) + PSAVE(I»K)
THE * OF SSWMM TIME-STEPS IN A WECEIV TIME-STEP
DELT
ON'.'EHTING AND PRINTING ROUTINES IF FLOWS
LUTANTS WERE INIT1ALIALLY SUMMED AND AVERAGED
SE SUM AND AVERAGE SSWMM QUALITY AND QUANTITY
EP INFORMATION FOR EACH INLET
CH RECLIV TIME-STEP
,16,222
ETS
POLLUTANT MASS LOADS
ME-STEPS AS NECESSARY
SAME TIME AS A RECCIV
POLLUTANT MASS LOADS
ARE SUMMED FOR EACH INLET FOR AS
UNTIL A SSWKM TIME-STEP OCCURS
TIME-STEP.
ARE THEN AVERAGED
E KECEIV TIME STCP LENGTH
TSrf
ME,IFLSV (MN> ,MNri,INLETS>,
ETS
tIl*FLSVm
)
T
OLII,K>*PSAVECI,KI
Ef4D OF KILE
55,7f'55
f PSAVE tMN , M , N = l ,NPFI I,MN =
ST SSWMMM TIME-STEP DOES NOT OCCUR AT THE
ME AS THE NEXT RECEIV TIME-STEP, ADD AS MANY SSWMM
EPS UNTIL BOTH TIHE STEPS OCCUR TOGETHER
TADD-RZE30)/f7DELT
FLOATf^TDF)
,12,13
13
12
222
GO TO 7
68
THR=CTIMC-*TAD0>/360Q.
TIME = TIHE * TADD
WRITE(6,UGO> TIME.PTLE
00 8 1 = 1, INLETS
DO 88 N=1,1I
PPRTIM>=O.D
...CONVEMT FLOW TO M 3/SEC
FSUM=TFLO(I>*.J28317/NTSW
NPWT=NPOLLf II
DO 11 J^l.NPWT
X-NPIM I ,J)
TRC NEW
TRC CHN&
-152-
-------
* * * *
c
c....
C 10
c
c....
9
11
8
15
L=NPOT(I,J)
IFCX-3) 9,10,9
....CONVERT F. COL1FORMS TO 1U**6 MPN/LEC
PPRTCLUTPOLU,3)*l.b66E-08/NTSW
GO TO 11
....CONVERT OTHER POLLUTANTS TO MG/SEC
PPRT (LUTPOLU.K )* 7559 .87/NTSW
CONTINUE
WRITE(6,110) l.FSUM,X
}
///,lfiX, 'PROGRAM TO INT£*»-!i*E
,J
I)
TA
2X
2X
15
, '
A
IN
C;
, CAPSPII, J1,J-1,11)
INS
FLOWS
AND POLLUTANT
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
CHNG
CHNG
,I2,2X ,' IN LETS', // ,10X,»
, 'RA
1NFALL
X, 'POSITIO
*!'.
T TI
CU
COL
3X ,'«2
ME -',
M/SEC'
IFORMS
STEPS', //,10X
N OF POLLUTANT
',3X,»»3',3X,«
2X, F6.0, 2X,
/ 10X,
(IF MODELED)*
TRC
TRC
TRC
CHNG
NEW
NEW
, 'FLOW* , 11 (3X,2A3) //)
r SSWHM OUTPUT FILE TO INP
SETUP BLOCK OF Rt.CEIV II MODEL1)
(
,
1H1,
2X,
//,10X, 'IK-PUT INTO RECEIV 11
»A»?E AS FOLLOWS* /10X , «FLOy
A
IK
'POLLUTANT LOADINGS IN MG/SEC;
STOP
FORMAT
FORMAT
{
1
*
11(3
/7X,
/ 10
1C
10
' IN MPNE+D6/SCC.'// 5X, 'INLE
X,2A3)// )
12, F 11 .^ ,1 If 1X,F8.1) >
X, •RECCIVE START TIME ', F6
X, 'WLCEIVE TIME STEP ' , F6
X, '1SOY = ', 15)
T TI
CU
COL
T',
ME',2X
M/SEC'
IFORMS
6X, 'F
,F6.0,2X ,'SEC*
/ 1UX,
UF MODELED)'
LOW",
.U//
.0
//
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
TRC
CHNG
NEW
CHUG
CHNG
CHNG
NEW
NEW
NEW
ino
-153-
-------
* * * *
PROGRAM QUANT
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
100
200
300
C
C
C
BASIN MODEL TEST PROGRAM
COMMON BLOCKS TC ZERO ARRAYS
COMMON /CONTR/ 12122 J
COMMON /HEADS/ IZZt62»
COMMON IZZZO9281
TAPE FILES
COMMON/TAPES/1NCNT,IOUTCT,JINI1D1,JOU1i101,NSCRATf51
INTEGER *iis
ZERC ARRAYS
UO 1DU 1=1,22
IZJI>=Q
UO 200 1-1,622
1ZZI11=0
UO 3QC, 1 = 1 ,8928
I2ZZJI1=0
SETUP TAPE FILES
Mb -6
INCNT=0
iOUTCTro
JIN( 1> - 25
JOUT(1
NSCRAT
NSCRAT
NSCKAT
LFILE =
2> =
3) =
H ) =
27
28
FORMAT
IF <«UN.E0.1 ) GO TO 2
CALL SETUP (Ni5»»N6, JINI1 > ,LFILE>
CALL REFLG.I
STOP 1111
END
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
BASI
3
«4
5
6
7
8
9
1C
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
2b
27
28
29
30
31
32
BASI 39
BASI
BASI
-154-
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE RE FLOW
COMMON /TftPLSX INCNT ,10UTC1 ,J1M 1L) , JGUT t 1U> ,NSCHU ( 5k RECE 2
UIML^SION .jUftN (J I ,OUAL (1 ) , AMAME ( «4 ) RECE 3
DATA wtJANt 1» ,L JAN«2> /•* HQU AN , <»HT IT Y / RECE <*
DATA CUALI1 ) ,C'UAL(2) /«* HCiJAL, <4HI T Y / RECE 5
Nb=5 RECE b
N6=fe RECE 7
INCNT-INCM* 1 RECE 8
HEAD tN5t130> (ANAHE il > , 1-1 ,«») RECE V
10U FORMA7(t«ftt»,I«») RECE 10
IF < ANAM£( 1) .EU.QUAN ( 1 ). AND. ANAMEU) .EQ.QUAN(2)> CALL SWFLOW RECE 11
UOn WRITE»N6,SQO> RECE 17
500 FORMAT <31HDRECEIVING SIMULATION COMPLETED) RECE 18
RETURN RECE IV
LNO RECE 20
-155-
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE SETUP INS ,Ki6,N2 1 ,N22 )
IIMTEliEU TYPE
DIMENSION TI TU:('4L), ISUUUQ) tNSI 10J.« 1C I .CONST 111 ),PTIME< 1501 t SETU 3
1Q(15QI «QN03E (1 JO ) ,Wl fH ( 1 00 1 , PA*AH ( 150 , 11» » TYPE (1 50 »t Cl 11 111001 SE TU 4
READCN5,1031) UITLE(I),1=1,40> SETu 5
1001 KORMATC2JA4) SETU 6
WRITE(N6,2Q01) ( TI TL E 111 ,1 = 1 , «»U 1 SETU 7
20P1 FORMAT<1H1,2UA4/1H ,20A4) SETU 8
REWIND K21
WEWIHD N22
^RITECN211 ITITLEII) tl = l, , (NS ( L ,K I ,K = 1 ,10) SETU 26
2QC<» FORMATI1H ,1113) SETU 27
211 CONTINUE SETU 28
rfR!TE(N21> ( 1S*!(L),L-1 .^JS-i) SETU 29
NiNRCC^O SETU 30
TTIME^O.O SETU 31
00 25 MM = 1,150 SETU 32
25 PT1MEINN>=-1 .0 SETU 33
7U «LAD SETU 44
oO TO 3D SETU 45
r'0 DO 70 L=l,MJSfe SETU 46
ONODCtDrt.Q SETU 47
WlTH(L)-T.n SETU 48
DU 52 KK=I ,1 1 SETU 49
32 CT(KK,LJ=C.-J SETU 50
JO bU K=l,10 SETU 51
N = MS(L,K) SETU 52
IF(N.Ew.-f) 60 TO fc'l SETU 53
QN3CCIL)^CMODE«L)*Q
-------
.-»
iFI
DO
IF
ig IM .
S6 KK
( 1YPE
LT.
-It
b
(iO
T
0
S<*
* * *
SETU b5
SETU 56
CT -CT(KKfL)*PARAM(^KK »*Q4 CTCKK ,L J =CT< KK,L >*PA*AM(N,KK I/ID JU. SETU 60
^6 co^4^I^uE SETU 61
GO TO feU SETU 62
58 WITHCL»='*ITH(L )-iJtN) , SETU 63
fcO CONTINUE SETU 6<4
70 CONTINUE SETU 65
KKITE1N21) TT1ME,CQNuDE(L>,WITH(LJ,
-------
* * * *
SUBROUTINE TRIAN(1J,JJVKK,LLI TRIA 1
c SUBROUTINE T>3) ,NEXIT TRIA 15
C TRIA 16
C JUNCTIONS TRIA 17
C TRIA 18
COMMON HI1Q), HNdD), HT(10), HBAR(IQ), HAVEdQ>t NCHANC10,8»,
1 IPCINT< 10,6), AS(1D), VOL(IO), X(10», YC1Q), DEPtlGI,
2 COF(10>t UIMI1D), OOU(IO), QINST(IQ), 4INBARI1Q),
3 QOU8ARC101
C TRIA 23
C CHANNELS TRIA 21
C TRIA 25
C01KON LtNdOJ, NJUNCUQ,2>, BUD), RIIOJ, A(10), AT(10), AKdOJ,
1 0(10), vjBAR(lO), OAVEtlQlt VI1D), «TUO), VBARUOI»
2 FUIMDI10), NUMCHIlOlf NTEMP(6I, NCLOS(1U>, RBARC10I
C TRIA 30
C PRINTOUT AND PLOTTING TRIA 31
C TRIA 32
COMMON NPRT, IPRT, NMPRT, JPRTdO), PRTH (250 , 101 v NOPRT, CPRTIlOlt
1 P9TVI2Sa, I0», PRT3«25U,10 >, IDUMd2), ICOLdO»t LTIME,
2 NPLTt NPDEL, • JPLTdQI t HPLTdOl
C TRIA 36
C STAGE-TIME COEFFICIENTS TRIA 37
C TRIA 38
COMHON YYJbO) ,TT«50J , A A (10 > ,XX (10 I , SXX dO » 10 ) ,SXYt 10 > TRIA 39
1 , AlfA2t A3,Ai* ,A5,A6,A7, PERIOD, JGW TRIA <»0
C TRIA «41
C STORMyATER TRIA 42
C TRIA <43
COMHOtvi TITLE(30) ,NJSW,CE(20t2) , JSWI2CJI TRIA H4
2, RAlNdOD), INT1HE (1 00 ) , IKRA IN , JBOUND f 20 ) t JJFiOUN TRIA US
C. TRIA <*6
C TAPES TRIA «»7
C TRIA <46
COHHON /1APES/ 1NCNT , I OUTCT , JIN J 10 ) , JOUT (10 > »NSCRAT I 51 TRIA «*9
C TRIA bO
C, TRIA 51
COMMON/TRI/T (b),NX«S> TRIA 52
C TRIA 53
C TRIA 5««
C TYPE OESI&NATIOKS TRIA 55
C TRIA 56
-158-
-------
# * * *
INTEGER Cf^
REAL Lh\
IFUI.Nt.lJ)
C
c
25U
C
c
c
C
C
C
c
c
c
r-
W
C
r
L
GO TO
UO 25C I=l,Nj
DO 25GJ-1.8
1P01NTII,J)=Q
NCHANfli J)=«J
CONTINUE
RETURN
POINTLR
SET UP IRIANSLL PARAMETERS
?rn CONTINUE
= 11
-JJ
ZKK
-II
= JJ
NX(1
NX (2
NX(3
NX(M
NX Cb
Ull - <
1(21 - <
TI3) - (
TCO-T (1 )
T15)=T<2»
X(JJJ - XCKK
X«KK » - XIII
XIII) - X*T (M»
u-jOfV7 (T (M) » /£.
-SUB* «2
TKI A
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRI*
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRI«
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRI ft
ARRAYTRTA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRTA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRTA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TPIA
58
:>9
6U
61
62
63
6'»
6S
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
7H
75.
76
77
78
79
an
81
82
83
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
96
97
98
99
1 JU
101
1 J?
103
1Q<4
105
106
1U7
IQfc
109
1 ID
111
-159-
-------
* * * *
AS(I )~AS(I Mb
AS(J)=AS(J)*G
1F(C.LE.O.) yp ITf 16, 102P H,C
102 FORHATJ2HI NEGATIVE WIUTH CHANNEL NO.tI5,lQH
B(M)-B«MJ*C
WIDTH =,E12.»»)
A(M)=B(M I*R(M|
AK/2.
VtM)=0.
600 CONTINUE
IF(LL.EQ.D RETUWN
00 750 NN;3t<»
I = M1NO
00 620 Krl.s
IF (1POINTIIVK).EQ.J> GO TO 6«»0
IFIIPOINTII,K) .EU.U1 GO TO 6 3D
620 CONTINUE
63U IPOINf (I ,K)=J
H=NCHAN( I,K»
NJUNCIH, 1)=I
NJUNCCM, 2J-J
SUB-TI3)*! tt )-Tt2I
G^SORTCT (2) J/2.
LEN(M»rG
C = G/SCRT(*».*T I3)*f (M I -SUB**2 »*SUB
G=G/2.*C
AS(I )=ASCI>*G/2.
ASCJI=AS( J) + G/,?.
IFIC.LE.U.I WRITEC6,1D2» M,C
li!M)=BIMMC
W«H) -(OE^< IMDtP (JJ) /2.
A(M)-BIM !*:-?< Ml
V(M>-0.
75U CONTINUE
RETURN
LND
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIft
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRIA
TRTA
TRIA
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
12b
129
130
131
132
133
13<*
135
136
137
138
139
110
111
1H2
115
1Mb
117
1<48
119
15fJ
151
-160-
-------
* * * *
!>UtSROUT INL T IDCF t IT IUE ,
c
c
c
c
t
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
, H AX i T ,NCHT IU>
C
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
f
,-
C
f,
c
STALE TIME COEFFICIENTS
HYDRODYNAMICS PROGRAM
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
CONTROL
COMMON /CONTR/ N5 ,»46 ,N2Q, N21 , N TC YC ,NQC YC ,NHC YC , NT.NQSWRT
It OELTQ.UELT.TZERO, ISWCHI1Q1
GENERAL
COMMON ALPHAI30J, NJ,NC, ICYC»KCYC,NCYC, W IND,WDIR,EVAP
1 , PRECP(50) ,NEXIT
JUNCTIONS
COMMON H(ia», HNUOIf HTC10), HBAR(IQ), HAVEUOI, NCHANtlO»8>,
1 IPCINTI 10,81, AS(101, VOLU01, X(1U), Y(1Q), OEPC101,
2 COFUU), JlN(lO), OOU(IO), QlNi.TUC'1, CINBAR(IO),
3 QOUBARtlQI
CHANNELS
COMMON LEN(IU), NJUNT « IH f 2 J , b(lU), RI1U), A(1Q», ATUOJ, AK(1D>,
1 OUO), iBAR(lb), OAVEIllJl, VflLJ, VTC1C1, VBARtlO),
2 FWIMUI1.JJ* NUMCHI1L1, N TEMP (8), NCLOSdUl, RBARU01
PRINTOUT AND PLOTTING
COMMON NPRT, IPKT, NMPRT, JPRT(IO), PRfH (2 5L , 1U) , NQPRT, CPRTUO)
1 PWTtf(25U,101, PPTO(250,in 1, IDUH(121, ICOLtlO), LTIME,
2 NPLT, NPDLL, JPLTI101, HPLTC10J
STAGE-TIME COEFFICIENTS
COMMON YY(50» ,TT(5n» , AA ( ID I ,XX ( 10 1 , SXX ( It), 10 1 ,SXY < 1C 1
l,AltA2,A3,A4,A3,A6,A7fPEMIOD,JG«»
STORrtUATER
COMMON TITLE <3U> ,NJSM,OF(2U,21,JSWJ2UJ
2, RA IN t lur) , JNTIMC < 1 bt? ) , INMA IN , JBOUND <2D ) , JJBOUN
CONTROLLED OR FORCED NODES
CO MM ON/HEADS/NT IDE , J T 1 DE (1 f> > , T IDE ( 15 , 7 ) ,NDAM , JOAM I'jD ,2) ,
liJAMt 5U,3 ) ,OELHH( 501 , SPILL (1C 01 , SPLiiA R (1 DU 1
TAPfcS
N /TAPE S/ INCNTMOUTCT, J1U( 101 , JIMJT < 101,NSCRAT(bl
TIDC
Tine
TIDC
noc
TIDC
TIDC
TIOC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIOC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
UPC
TIDC
TIDC
1
2
5
14
5
6
7
8
V
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
24
25
26
SI
32
33
37
36
3*
4U
41
M2
43
44
45
'16
47
48
4V
5 Li
bl
b2
b3
r,4
fib
Sb
-161-
-------
*
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* * *
INTEGER CFRT
REAL LEN
WRITEtN6,13Q I JTICEt
130 FORMATU7HQ FOR T10A
WRITE (Nfa,1401 KO,NI
140 FORMAT « 7HQ KO IS, I
1 OF ITERATIONS IS, 14
DELTA : 0.005
MIT- 7
4 - 2. *3. 14159 /PE*I
IF1KO.EQ.O) GO TO 22
TT<5o> -TTci )*PERIOD
YYt5GI=YYU>
00 22D 1-1,4
J-I* 1
IF CJ.GT.4) J-5Q
NI-NI+1
TT(M):(3.*TT(I » + TT<
YY(NIJr0.8535*YY 1 1 ) +
NI-N1+1
TT(NI J-f TTI1I+TTI Jl »
YY(NJ }-{ YY(I»+YY (J) J
WI-NI+1
TT FOKf-'&T (2 9 HO NO.
WRITE <^b,148) (1,TT
TIDE COEFFICIENTS
.
TYPE DESIGNATION
TIDAL CURVE FIT, 7 TERM
SINUSOIDAL EQUATION
ITIDEJ
L NODE ,131
,MAX1T,NCHTID
3,19H NUMBER OF TERMS IS,I4,32H MAXIMUM
,21H TIDE CHECK SWITCH IS, 12)
IF KO EQUALS ONE, PROGRAM
READ FOUR POINTS OF INFORM
AND EXPAND THEM FOR A FULL
NT IS THE NUMBER OF INFORM
POINTS
MAXIT IS THE MAXIMUM NUM8E
ITERATIONS
IF fcCHTID EQUALS ONE, TIDA
INPUT-OUTPUT WILL 8E PRINT
DELTA IS THE ACCURACY
LIMIT IN FEET
00
'>
J) )/4.
U. 146S*YY 1 J)
/2 •
12 .
J> »/4.
0.8535*YY( JJ
TO 2-40
TIME VALUE \
til , YYCIJ , I=1,NIJ
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIOC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
NUMBERTIDC
TIDC
WILL TIDC
AT ION TIDC
TIDE TIDC
TIDC
ATION TIDC
TIOC
R OF TIDC
TIDC
L TIDC
ED TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIDC
TIOC
57
59
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
8?
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
1JLJ
1U1
1 J2
103
104
lOb
106
107
108
109
110
111
-162-
-------
* * *
I4b FORMAT (14, *F12.3 > TIDC 112
•>i*u CONT inw: ' Tine 113
UO 28D J-l,N I I TIDC 114
DO 26( Kzl,NTT TJ DC 115
260 SXX(K,JJ : D. TIDC lib
AMJ) = 0. TIDC 117
260 SXYIJI ~ L. TIDC 118
NJ2 - NTT/2 •» 1 TIDC 11V
DO 3bO I = 1 ,N1 TIOC 120
DO 32U J - 1 ,KiTT TIDC 121
FJ1 = FLOAT(j-l> TIDC 122
FJ3 -' FLOAT I J-NJ2 J TIDC 123
IF ( J.LE.NJ2 t GO TO 3GU TIDC 124
XX(JJ = COS = SXY(JI *XX(J) *YYII) TIDC 12V
00 310 J - 1 ,MT TIDC 130
DO 3UC K : 1 tf»TT TIDC 131
310 SXXIK.J) r SXXIK,J) *XX(K) *XX(J) TIOC 132
3fcCJ CONTINUE TIDC 133
IT r U TIDC 13«*
3fcH 11 = IT * 1 TIDC 135
QELMAX = C. TIDC 136
DO <42U K - 1 ,NirT TIDC 1 37
SUM r ;i. TIDC 138
DO 100 J - 1,KTT TIDC 139
IF CJ.EQ.K1 GO TO '»:):,} TIDC 1«*0
bUM - SUM -A A(J)*S. GO TO 4*»D TIDC 117
IF (DELMAX.GT. JELT4 ) GO TO 38U TIDC 1M-8
bO TO -46U TIOC 149
14G wkITt(N6 ,150 ) TIOC ISO
Jr>Lt FORMAT (69HCAKNOT PEACH DESIRED DELTA, INCREASE EITHER MI OR DELTATIDC 1 «i 1
1 AND TWY A3AIK'! TIDC 152
STOP 6666 TIDC 153
<*t-J CONTIKUC TIDC 15**
00 t7C KOtF-1,7 TIDC 155
473 TIDE (ITIDE ,KOEF)=Aft( ,2> TIDC 158
U2 FORMAT C46HO TIME OBSERVED COMPUTED D1FF I TIDC 159
HES - J. HOC 160
00 52u I - 1,M TinC Ibl
SUM ~ J. TIDC 162
Uj SDL J - 2,NTT TIDC 163
FJl - FLOAT ( J-l I TIDC 164
FJJ - FLOAT I J-MJ2 J TIDC 165
IF ( J.LE.NJ..' » ;»C TO !|SJ TIOC 166
-163-
-------
* # * *
SUM - SUM +AAIJ) *COSIFJ3*W*T1(I I) T1DC l67
60 TO 500 TIOC lfa8
480 SUM = SUM *AA(J) *SIMFJl*tf*TT(IM TIDC l69
500 CONTINUE TIOC 17°
SUM ; SUrt *AAI1» TIDC 171
D1FF = SUM -VVU) TIDC 172
RES = RES « ABSJUIFFJ TIDC in
520 rfRITECN6, 1 5 TIDC 17S
rfklTE (Mb,156) RtS TIDC 176
156 FORMAT (6HUTOTAL , 3UX, F12.«« I TIDC l 11
5«4U CONTINUE TIDC 178
c TIDC 17V
C CONSTANTS FOR INPUT HAVE FORM TIDC 180
c TIDC 181
WRITEHM6,1S8 J JT IDE I IT IDE ) , I T1UE II TI DE, I > ,1 = 1 .71 .PER IOD TIDC 182
15B FORMAT1///16H COIFFICIENTS FOR TIDAL INPUT WAVE AT JUNCTIONl6//85HTIDC 183
1 Al A2 AJ A - Al + A?.SIN(fciT) * A3.SINI2WTI * A^.SIN(3UT> * A5.TIOC 186
<»COSCWT) * A6.COS12WT) * A7.COSC3WTM TIDC 187
RETURN TIDC 188
LND TIDC 189
-164-
-------
!) * * *
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
SUBROUTINE SWFLOW
INTEGER CFRT
REAL LEN.INTIME
COMMON /CCNTR/ N5.N6
1, DELTQ.DELT.TZERO,
COMMON ALPH
1, PKECP(SO)
A(
30) ,
,N20,N21f N
iSWCHdO)
UJ,NC, ICY
HYUr.ODYiN.AMKS
TIDAL OPTION
SPECIFICATION
CONTROL
TCYC ,NOCYC tNHCYC
GENERAL
C,KC
YC.NCV
C, W
STAT
, N
1MD,
EMENTS
T.NOSWRT
WDIR,EVAP
,NEXIT
JUNCTION
COMMON HdOl
1 IPO IN
2 COFd
t
1 (
01
3 QOU8AR1
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
f*
s.
L
f.
C
c
(J
c
(.
.-
COMMON LENd
1 w(10)
2 FwIND
COMMON NPkT,
I PRTVC
2 NPLT,
COMMON' YYI50
1 Al A2 A3 A1
COMMON TITL
2, rfAINdUCil,
0)
t
( 1
HN d 0 1
10,8) ,
» C I N (
10)
, KiJUN
OBAKd
J) , NU
IPRT, N
25
)
f. (
IK
JtlUlt
POEL t
,TT (50
5 A6 A
iLi> tMJ
TlMEd
, HT(1U>, HB
ASdO)» VOL
ini, coudci
C(i(!,i;), b d
U), QAVEdU)
riCHdDI, Mt
HP RT, JPRFd
P f? T 3 ( 2 5 Q , 1 0
JPLTdLJJ, HP
> » A 4 J 1 C ) » X X
f PERIOD J G w
SW,9L(20f2 ) »
ARd
(1U1
, QI
CH
0),
t V I
HP(8
PR
0),
I* 1
Lid
ST
< U)
ST
JSW(
01, HA
, XdD
NST( 1C
ANNELS
R 1 1 0 1 ,
1L 1 f V
) , NCL
I N T 0 U T
P^TH(2
DUM(12
01
AbE-TI
,SXX( 1
OkMWAT
2L)
001 f INRA1K, J80UNDC20I ,
C
J
VE (101
>, Yd
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
1
2
3
5
6
3
9
1C
11
12
13
15
16
17
IB
19
20
21
, NCHAMdO,8l,
01,
>, CINBARI
A diJ)
Td( 1,
OSdOl
, AT
VBA
, RB
AND PLOTT
50,101
DEPdOl,
IU),
«10> , AK (131 »
HdU ) ,
AK« 101
ING
, ^QPRT, CPRTdOl
), 1 COL (10
HE COE
Q,1C»,
ER
JJBOUN
CONTROLLED 0
CO MM ON /HE A r)S
1UAM< !iC»3l ,0i:
/'*
LH
TIflE ,J
M 50 J,
TI')t ( 15) ,T IU
SPILL( li J> ,S
E( 15
,7J ,ND
AK ,JUA
F F I C
SXY(
J , LT1ME ,
IENTS
101
R FORCED NODES
Ml 50
t2),
PLBAKdrj'Jl
fA
PIS
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
t
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
26
27
28
33
3«4
35
39
"40
41
*«2
'4 3
»45
46
*47
18
49
5U
51
52
53
5*4
55
b6
-165-
-------
* *
c
c
c
c
c
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT ,10UTCT,JIN I ID) ,JUUTUUJ ,NSCRAT(5»
COMMON/ST2X T1TEL2UU)
DIMENSION* ENDEK(2) ,VOLBARUOO»
COMMON QTI50,2J,1SWI5C>
DATA ENDERU J ,D4UEI» ( 2 > /1HENDQ , 1HUANT /
TYPC
201
2C5
2C9
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
DESIGNATIONS
INITIALIZATION
N2Q - NSCRAT(1)
NEXIT=0
00 205 1-1,50
DEPCI)=0.0
AS(IJ=0.
U1N=0.
UO 231 J-1,8
1POINTCI,J)=Q
NCHANII,J»=0
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
[JO 210 1-1,100
KwlMDll) = 0.0
g(I1=0.0
UO 209 J-1,2
NJUNCtl,J>=0
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
CALL INDATA
10UTCT - IOUTCT +
N21-JIN(1KCNTI
:-i22 = JOUTJIOUTCT
ME^l^D N22
NT INT = 0
TT( 1 t - J.'l
T T(2 ) - 0.0
NSTEPS - Q
MJSW =• D
NUUAL = 0
TDELT ~ (J
DO 22C 1=1,13
1COL.U1=I
UO 222 1=1,20
ISW(1> = C
w 1 ( .1 ,1 ) =0.0
:, T (I »k' J = 0. 0
SUBROUTINE INDATA CALLED TO
READ INPUT DATA
FURTHER INITIALIZATION
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
61
65
66
67
68
69
71
72
73
7<4
75
76
77
78
79
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
91
95
9(3
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
10
-------
* *
UE(I ,1) - j.U
UL(1,2> - Q.U
U.-C.
TEP-U.
DLLT2=OELT/2.L
223
22<»
225
C
C
C
C
7H97
7091
7092
EVAPzEVAP/(10UCI.*3U.*e64nQ.
TOLD=U.
PREC = 0.0
T-T2LRO
DO 224 I - l,MHPftT
MJPKT - JPRT (11
PKTH 11,1) = MMJPRT
CONTINUE
DO 225 I = l.NQPRF
MCPRT r CPRT(l)
PRTC' < 1 ,1 )
PR TV (1,1)
CONT 1NUE
Q(MCPFT)
VIMCPFM
READING OF INITIAL HYDWGGRAPH
INFORMATION FRO> INTERFACING
GO TO 2 JO
TI fEL2
TITEL2
IF4N21.EQ.OI
MEWIND N21
READ (N21)
WklTE (N6.7Q97)
FGRMAT(1HI,2DA */
REAL (N21) NSfEPS,v JSW,Nl."JAL, TUELT, T2c".RO,TAREA
JRITE (N6,7D91) NS fE !JS ,v,.js«», NOUAL , TDLL T , TZtRO ,TARE A
FORMAT (3I10,3F1D.2I
«EAD(lw21) (ISW(L I ,L-l.MJSW )
FO«KCT(5115)
i
-------
* * * !*
C
c
c
c
IN111AL TIME-STAGE
COMPUTED
IF=A1«A2*S1N(W*T
236 CONTINUE
C
C
C
) + A3*SIN(2.*W*TI*A
l**6*CQSt2.*W*n-»A7*COS(3.*W*1»
CHANNEL CONSTANTS COMPUTED
260
00 280 N=1,NC
IFINJUNC(N,1 ).LE.D>GO TO 280
AKIN >=9. 80621*2. 2C79*AK tN)**2/2. 208196
NH:NJUNCIN,2 I
K(Nt=K(NM(H
DO
VOL( J)-0.
IF CAblJ> .EQ.O.)
VOLUME = V OL UM F_ •»3 t N 1 *L EN < N J
3CCJ CONTINUE
32'J ULPTH-VOLUME/AWE A
t/OL(J>-nEI"TH*A$tJ)
^n coNT INi
C
C
START OF PROGRAM CORE* WITH
MAJOR HYDRAULIC COMPUTATIONS
SWFL 168
SWFL 169
KE.LAT10NSHIP SWFL 170
SWFL 171
SWFL 172
SWFL 173
SWFL 17«4
SWFL 175
SWFL 176
SWFL 177
SWFL 178
SWFL 179
SWFL 180
SWFL *181
SWFL 182
SWFL 183
SWFL 18<4
SWFL 185
SWFL 186
SWFL 187
SWFL 188
SWFL 189
SWFL 190
SWFL 191
SWFL 192
SWFL 193
SWFL I9t
SWFL 195
SWFL 196
YINHI-YINLMI»SWFL 197
SWFL 198
SWFL 199
SWFL 200
SWFL 2U1
SWFL 2U2
SWFL 203
SWFL 20<(
SWFL 205
SWFL 206
SWFL 207
SWFL 208
SWFL 209
SWFL 210
SWFL 211
SWFL 212
SWFL 213
SWFL 21*4
SWFL 215
SWFL 216
SWFL 217
SWFL 218
SWFL 219
SWFL 220
SWFL 221
SWFL 222
-168-
-------
*
c
c
c
c
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
r
C
r
C
31*5
350
T9
STAhT OF DAY 00 LOOPS OUTER
LOOP OK i NESTED DO LOOPS
110
1)0 1 313 NT = 1 ,MCVC
IF INT.LT.NOSWKn GO
REWIND N22
DO 345 J=1,NPLT
1-IABS< JPLH JJ I
HPLT (Jl-HCll
TO 35U
HOLrt, ChPLTIJl ,J=1 ,NPLT)
NPTOTrl
CONTINUE
LTIME - i
UO
STtKT OF QUALITY DO LOOP
INITIALIZATION OF ARRAYS USED
FOR HYDRAULIC OUTPUT TO BE USED
BY THE SWOUAL SUBROUTINE
IF (N1.LT.MOSW3T I
UO 36li N = 1,NC
GO. TO 38J
(M=0.
/[) J-1»K!J
K t J >-!_,.
UlNb Ak( J)-U.
UOUbAkt J)-0.
SPLE>Ak {J 1 = 0. U
370 CONTINUE
3eu CONTINUE
START OF HYDRAULIC DO LOOP,
INNERMOST 00 LOOP OF 3 NESTEO
UO LOOPS
UO
IFCM .LT.NQSWRT)
IIKL-1IME*OEL.T
GO TO
PRECIPITATION COMPUTATIONS FOR
EACH TI?T STEP
IF (KRAIN-I'-lRAlMi 395 , «* 10, <4 10
IF ( T lHL-IN?IHE(KkAIN*l ) ) 4G5 , k JO
KHAIN-K
1-TOL01 / ( 1000.*
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
2?. 3
22M
22B
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
23<*
235
23b
237
236
239
2 '*0
241
242
243
244
245
24fc
247
24B
249
250
2S1
252
253
254
2Sb
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
2f>l
264
2b5
266
2b7
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
2 ?b
2 fh
277
-169-
-------
* * *
105
110
118
120
12b
130
t>0 TO 39 LI
131
7093
133
135
110
C
C
c
c
C
c
C
470
1' fc
)/DELT
IfcO
CONTINUE
IF = (QIN{Jl+QTtL,Il>* ,L = 1 1 MJSW »
FLOWS ARE ,/
= 1,HJSW)
)6X ,bFl 5.3 > 1
IF (T1ME.LE.TF.) GO TO HBO
TEO=TE
DO <*6C' L = l
READ INS,10H» TE,(4E,JJ=I,NJSWI
FORMAT (8F10.C)
CONTINUE
TEP-TE/3hD3.
•jRITE(N6,ia6 ) TEP, (Qt«L,2) ,L=1 ,NJSWJ
FORMAT (1M ,F7.2»10F10.1/C8X,1QFI0.1M
00 SOU
SWFL 278
SWFL 279
SWFL 280
SWFL 281
SWFL 282
SWFL 283
SWFL 281
SWFL 285
SWFL 286
SWFL 287
SWFL 288
SWFL 289
SWFL 290
SWFL 291
SWFL 292
SWFL 293
SWFL 291
SWFL 295
SWFL 296
SWFL 297
SWFL 298
SWFL 299
SWFL 300
SWFL 301
SWFL 302
SWFL 303
SWFL 301
SWFL 305
SWFL 306
SWFL 307
SWFL 308
SWFL 309
SWFL 310
SWFL 311
READ HYDWOGKAPH INPUT OR AVERAGESWFL 312
OR INTERPOLATE FOR TIHE STEP SWFL 313
SWFL 311
SWFL 315
SWFL 316
SWFL 317
SWFL 318
SWFL 319
SWFL 320
SWFL 321
SWFL 322
SWFL 323
SWFL 321
SWFL 325
SWFL 326
SWFL 327
SWFL 328
INTERPOLATE HYDROGRAPH SWFL 329
SWFL 330
SWFL 331
SWFL 332
Pn/DELT
READ HYDROGRAPHS
-170-
-------
* * * *
SLOPE- (QT (L,?I-OE tL, 1 I )MT£-TLO»
5U3 JlNIJ>=OINSHJ)*UE .GT.3.D.S)
V T C N ) rO . 0
J(N)-D.O
GO 10 580
CONTINUE
(, 0 TO
-H ( NL I> /LEN( N)
2*FUINDCN l/R(N
V2 = V (M J+DELV2
l./TflMP*2.*A3S(V21 )-
J **2-4 .4
iw('*l»-VT(N1*A
r;cu CONTINUE
COMPUTATION OF NODAL STAGE AT
HALF TIME STEP
JO *9C; J-1,1 00
SPILL < J»=C.O
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
333
33»»
33i
336
337
33d
339
3<40
311
3M2
343
3<4«»
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
36C-
361
362
363
364
355
366
367
366
369
370
371
372
3 H
374
375
376
377
378
379
3riO
331
382
383
334
335
3 ,-i 6
337
-171-
-------
* * * *
i)G 6t>0 J-l.NJ
SWFL
SWFL
653
6MJ
00 6^(1 Kri,«
IF (NCHANCJ.K I.LC.L) GO TO 620
N=NCHAN( J,K)
IF IJ.K'E.NJUNCm, il IGU TO 6f)C
bO TO 620
600 bUM«=SUMQ-QIN)
620 CONTINUE
64U IF lASt J) .LC.O. J GO TO 66U
SUMC=QOU(JI-01N( J) + ( f.VAP-PREO*AS
IF INUAM.LE.O J GO TO 642
00 641 IOAM=l,rtDAM
KDAM-IDAM
IFIJ.EQ.JDAMlhDAM,!)) GO TO 650
641 CONTINUE
642 HT IJ)rH( J1-DLLT2*SUMQXAS< J>
IF (HT< JMDEP ( JJ.GT.O.) GO TO 66U
HT=-DEF CJI
VOL( J»=rJ.
ASIJ»=-AS( J>
UO 6M5 Krl,8
UX-NCHAN{J,K )
IF (NX.LE.C) GO TO 6<4 S
NCLOSINX )-l
&t5 CONTINUE
-SPILL « J)+SUMQ
GO TO 660
650 CONTINUE
ULLHHIKD4M)=D.O
*£IR1-DAM
CONTINUE
HT(J)-H(J)*DELHH(KOAM»
CONTINUE
IF INUK V.EC.D I GO TO to?5
If (NTIMS.GT.2) &0 TO 675
DO 6 70 N=1,NC
If «N JUNC(K,1 I.LC.U) GO TO 670
IF(NCLOS(M.fct.J » GO TO 670
c(N) -U.
V ( 'O - 0 .
JO 6fefc 1-1,2
II-NJUMC t\,I I
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
StfFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
388
33V
390
391
392
393
39«»
395
396
397
398
399
401
<402
M03
lOt
<405
406
<4Q7
410
Mil
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
43b
43b
437
43b
439
44Q
441
442
-172-
-------
* #
664
666
668
670
675
C
C
C
C
67o
C
c
c
c
c
c
t>7
c
c
c
IF INCHANtII, JJ.EO..N)
CON!INUE
bO TO 668
rtCHANII! ,JU-N
MJUKCIN,I)=-II
CONTINUE
GO TO 541)
CONTINUE
GO TO 666
tJOUKDARY STAGE
HALF TIME STEP
CONDITION AT
IF-tMlOE.LE.OI GO TO 677
UC 6 76 I T1DE=1,NTIDE
JGW-JTIDLIITIDEJ
Al = TlDFmiDE,ll
A2=TIDEIITIUE,2)
A3 = 1IDE(I1IDC:t5)
A4-T1DE(ITIDE,4)
A5=TIDE
A7 = TIOEf HIDE,/)
HT(JGW)=A1+«2*SIN«W*T2)*A3*SIN(2.
1 +A5*COSJrf*T2)*A6*COS(2 .
CONTINUE
T2J +A4*SIN(3 .*y*T2 I
T2»-»A7*COS(3.*W*T2>
COMPUTATION OF CHANNEL CROSS-
SECTIONAL AREAS AT HALF TIME
STEF, FLOWS «T HALF TIMt STEP,
AND VELOCITIES AT FULL TIME STEP
UC 7-'4U N-1,NC
IFINJUNCIN,! ) .LE.DfiO TO 7411
NH-NJUNC(N,2 )
L»ELH-0.5*CHT JNHl -H (N H) *H T I ML )-H 4 NL
Hf, TrR(N) *DL"LH
AT (N )-A(.N)-»B (NI*[)ELH
DRY CHANNEL CHECK(UNOEk Q.U3HI
1FCRNT.GT.O.U3) GO TO 680
V I N ) -I: .
W(^>-U.
bG TO 7m
tOMT If.'UE
UtLV2-2.*VT(N>Ml.-A(N)/AT(N)
•*OELT*( tVT{N>**2*'5(N)/A T(N> )
. *F WIMD(N)/KN T*3ELT
>*(HT CNHI-HT
»/LEN(N
T IMF' rDEL T*AK (MX ^NT**1 .3333333
OtLV 1-!).'>*{( l./TtHF +2.*Ar-»SIV2 I)-
,*A.3S I V2)
Vt (>;) rV (N ) *aELVl*QFLV?
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SUFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SwFL
^i £i 7
ti it U
• 445
446
447
4 48
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
4bl
462
4o3
464
465
466
467
46«
469
470
4 71
4 J2
473
474
475
4 76
477
478
4 79
480
461
482
483
43<4
4BS
486
43?
488
489
490
4V1
492
493
494
495
496
497
-173-
-------
* * * 1)1
c
c
c
7oo CONTINUE:
IF (NT.LT.NQSWrtT > GO
QBAR(N)=qpAR(N)+Q(N)
V&AK(NI=VBAP(NI*VfN)
KBARlNlrWBAR (NMRIN)
720 CONTINUE
.CHANNEL FLOWS SUMMED
TO 721
C
C
C
EXCESSIVE VELOCITY CHECK
IF(ABS(V(NM .LC.b.O) GO TO 710
WRITE(6, 108) NT,NU,NHH,RINI,VINI,N
1H3 FORMAT C27HD V OVER 6 */S, TIDAL CYCLE,II,HH CUAL CYCLE,11,
112H HYDRO CYCLE, II,6H DEPTH,E1Q.1,1H V,E10.4,
26H CHANNEL,I5J
NEXlTri
710 CONTINUE
IF 1NEXIT.EU.1 ) GO TO 12*jQ
C
C
C
C
COMPUTATION OF
VOLUME: AT FULL
NODAL STAGE
TIME STEP
AND'
75L
760
DO 7bO J=1,10C
SPILLi J)-D.O
CONTINUE
UO 900 J=1,NJ
i.UMQ-0.
HN< J»r-D(IP( J)
1FIASIJ» »LE.O.) uO TO 90J
UU 800 K=l,3
1F(NCHAN(J,K J.LE.CI
;^-NCHfiN( J,K)
IF< J.NC.MJUNCI^,in&0 TO 780
780
8r,»)
c Bf I
l HH2
TO 8t>D
UO TO SOU
SUMO-SUMQ-Q(N)
CONTINUE
IFINTIDE.LE.UI GO TO RJJDJ
JO H*C1 ITIDL-l.'OIUf:
iU IDL-IT IDC
IF IJ.EQ. JTIDt tITlOC! > GO TO 801
CONTINUE
IF (NOAM.LE.O) GO TO 820
l)C 3ftC3 lL'*M = I
IF ( J.EQ. JC'AM (Ii)AH, II > GO T 0 80 2
•-•fiC 3 CONTINUE
oO TO 82,1
A1 ~ T IU C ( K T 11) E , I )
Aii-TU'tc* not ,.ii
AJ-TIltUKTIDE, i»
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWF!
SUFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
500
501
502
503
50«»
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
51H
515
516
517
516
519
520
521
522
523
52
-------
* * *
A<+-T10t /2.
IF CBASEl 803
SPILLIJOOWN) r
bC 10 80 b
UtLHH»KDAK>rDLLT/AS( J >* I -
CONTINUE
HN( J)-H< J)-»DtLHH
VOL( J1=VOLIJ)+OELHH( KDAM|*AS« J>
UO TO 82 S
CONTINUE
CHMJI-HIJ) J*AS ( Jl
J)-U.
JINJ J)-(DVOL/DELT I + SUMQ
IF )T.LT .NQS
DO V2J Jrl.NJ
HoAk ( JJ^HBAR ( JI+HN U J
u i *u; A P ( j > - Q i NE; ft«' ( j ) + 5
596
597
598
599
60U
6Ji
6U2
6 0 3
6Q<4
6U5
606
6U7
-175-
-------
*
c
c
c
c
* * *
960
980
C
C
C
C
985
9&b
990
C
C
C
inno
1120
FULL TIME STEP COMPUTATION OF
HYDRAULIC RADIUS AND CHANNEL
CROSS-SCCTIONAL AREAS
DO 980 N=1,NC
IF IKJUNCrR(N)-»DELH
AtN)=A«N)-»B(NJ*DELH
CONTINUL
COMPUTATION
MODE VOLUME
OF >OROINARY>
00 990 J^l.NJ
VOLt Jl=0.0
IF (ASf Jl.EQ.Q.J)
AfrEA=0.0
VOLUME-P.Q
DO 985 K=l,g
GO TO 990
IF(N.LE.;j» GO TO 935
AH E A -6 RE A*8 t N V*LCMN »
VOLUME=VOLUME*B(N)*LEN bO TO 986
OEPTHrVOLUilE/AREA
WOL< J)=DEPTH*AS( Jl
VOLBARt JlrVOLbAH( J) + VOLU)
CONTINUE
oo 1020 J-I.NJ
H«J)-HN«JJ
IF(NT.LT.NQSwRT) GO TO 1U1J
if (NPTOT.NC.WPOEL) GO TO 1030
00 1025 J-1,NPLT
I-IABS( JPLTI JH
NODAL STAGE ARRAYS SHIFTED
HOUR =HOU«-»DELT/3bOO.*FL OAT
WRITE »N22) HOUtf, tKPLTIJ),J=l ,NPLT)
WPTOT^O
END OF
LOOP
HYDRAULIC OR INNER 00
CONT1KUE
AVERAGING OF
VELOCITIES
FLOWS AND
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL634A
SWFL 635
SWFL
SWFL
SHFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
SWFL
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
653
634
636
637
638
63V
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
6 SO
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
6S9
660
661
-176-
-------
1U 11 JU
; * * *
IF INT.LI.UCSWrfT>
UC ICbJ W-1,NC
IF INJUNC IN,1 I.LL .1;) f.»0 TO lUbU
ijtlAH (N )r(K)AO (M/I'LOA 1 (NHCYC I
VBAK IN )-VB»R IM/FLJA TtNHCYCI
RbAR IM-rteAR INJ/FLOA 1 INHCYC)
UAVE(N)-UAVEIM*QfcAR(N)/FLOATlNQCYC)
1060 CONTINUE
DO 1QEO J-l.NJ
QINbARU IrQINBAR ( J) / FLO AT I NHCYC I
OOUPARIJ»=QOUBARIJI/FLOAT(NHCYCI
lib AR|J)= HEARIJ)/FLOATINhCYC»
VOLbAR(J)^VOLBAR(Jl/FLOAT(NHCYC)
SPLbARiJirSPLbARIJI/FLOATINHCYCI
IFIUINBAHIJ1 .E4.IJ.I GOTO 108U
IF IC.OUBARIJ) .EQ.U.) ROTO 10PU
QINBARIJ J-OI.VBAR (J)-OOUBAR(J»
aoueARCj)ro.
IFIUINbARIJ) .GT.O.) GO TO 1D60
iiOUB AR( JI=-CII
QINBAR (J):,3.
C0"n iNUE
C
c
C
L
C
t
t
c
1
1
WKT1L HYDRAULIC INFORMATION FOR
USE IN DUALITY PROGRAM
C
C
i IVCLbAR (Jl .UHdARIJ ) ,QCUBAR ( Jl ,HDAh I Jl,SFLBARIJI ,J- 1,NJ)
STO^L OUTPUT FUR SUBSEQUENT
PRINTOUT
IPO IF (NT.EQ.(NliS4RT-l) .AND.N-).LC.r,QCYC I GO TC 112U
tiO TO 11 «G
120 DO 11
6155
6B6
6B7
688
639
69U
691
692
693
6(><4
695
696
697
69£
69V
7 -JU
7 0 1
7')2
7DJ
7 J4
7.35
706
707
7U8
7U9
7 ][)
711
712
71 J
?m
715
716
-177-
-------
* * #
1220
C
C
C
1210
1260
1?80
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
13PO
I 320
1 310
11 J
1 360
1 "* P 3
112
1 «00
1 14
1 <4?l)
C
r
V*
v>
DO 1220 l:itNOPRT
ML'PRT-CPW Mil
PHTQ (LT1ME,! )=QIMCPPT)
PR TV (L TIME, I 1-tflMCPRT)
CONTINUE
IF (ISUCH(l) .NE.l > GO 10 1230
IF (NT.NE.NQSwrfT) SO TO 12«0
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
IF INT.LT.NQS*RT J GO TO 1300
CALL PPTOUT
CONTINUE
EKO FILE N20
REMIND N20
CONTINUE
MCOUNT - 0
liEAD (N5,110I FINAL,CARD
FORMA! (2A1)
IF (FINAL. EQ. ENDCRU »» GO TO 1
MCOUNT - KCOUNT + 1
IF GO TO 1330
GO TO 1310
IF GO TO 1380
GO TO 13 '40
WRITC lNb*1121
FORHAT (62HOQUALITY PROGWAH HA
IPLfTIONJ
STOP HHHH
4KITE (Nbtlltl
FDRHAT (33HOCOHPLETION OF RECE
CONT INUT
RETURN
rNU
SWFL 717
SWFL 718
SWFL 719
SWFL 720
SWFL 721
END OF QUALITY DO LOOP SWFL 722
SWFL 723
SWFL 721
SWFL 725
SWFL 726
SWFL 727
SWFL 728
SWFL 729
SUBROUTINE PRTOUT CALLED FOR SWFL 730
HYDRAULIC INFORMATION PRINTOUT SWFL 731
FOR A ONE DAY CYCLE SWFL 732
SWFL 733
SWFL 73*»
SWFL 735
SWFL 736
END OF SUBROUTINE SWFLOW SWFL 737
SWFL 738
SWFL 739
SWFL 7«»0
SWFL 7m
SWFL 7«»2
SWFL 713
SWFL 711
SWFL 715
3bU SWFL 716
SWFL 717
SWFL 718
SWFL 719
00 SWFL 750
SWFL 7S1
SWFL 752
SWFL 753
SWFL 751
S READ MORE THAN 30 CARDS AFTER COMPSWFL 755
SWFL 7b6
SWFL 757
SWFL 758
IVING QUANTITY) SWFL 759
SWFL 7oQ
SWFL 761
RETUKN TO SUBROUTINE RECEIV SWFL 762
SWFL 763
SWFL 761
SWFL 765
-178-
-------
SUdKOUTlNE INL.UA
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
C
c
f;
C
f
LSI PUT DATA
HYDRODYNAMICS
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
INTEGER CP3T
REAL LEN, INTI'IE
CuMMON /CONTR/ N5 ,N6 »N 20, W2 1 , NTC YC ,NyC YC ,NHC YC , NT.NQSi.IWT
1, DELTQ ,(JELT,TZf TO, 1SWCHUQ)
COrtlWOL
COMMON ALPHAI3D), NJ,NC,
It PRLCPIST) ,NEAIT
GENERAL
I C Y C ,KC YC ,NC YC ,
JUNCI10NS
IND , WDIR ,E VAP
1
2
3
COMMON NdfJ), HM(M)» HT(IU), HBARdUl, HAVE (JO), NCHANI1U(8>t
1POINT<13,8), AStlOlt VOLdOl, X(10>, >(10), DLPdOl,
COFdQ), QINI10), UOUdUJ, U INS! (10 I, fclNBARUO),
QOUBARdO >
CHANNELS
N LCN(IO), NJ!JNC< 10 ,2), bdH), RdO), AdJI, AT(ll), AK ( UI ,
1 Q(i;», J:iARd:5I, QAVEd'}), V ( 1C ) , VH1D, V3ARI10),
2 FWlNDdJ), ^UMCH(in), NTEMP(o), NCLOS(IQ), RBARdU)
PRINTOUT AVP PLOTTING
COMMON NPKT, IPHT, NHPRT, JPrtTdO), Pk TH ( 2SC , 1U ) , NfQPRT, CPRTdOl
1 PRTV( 25J, iD), PRTy(25U,10 ), IDUrt ,TTCF>D) « * A ( 10 » , XX ( 1U ) , SX.X ( 1 u , 1 f•) , SXY t 10 »
i i A 1 , A2 r A 3 ,- **» , A S , A6 r A / « PE Rl OD , J GW
CUMMON T ITLEI.JO) ,NJSW,OC (2C ,2 ) » JS-JJ 2U 1
?, HA iUdOt.) , IN TIKE ( 1 00 .l tINRA IN , J BOUND (2Q 1 , JJBOtJN
CONTROLLED OR FORCED NODES
CO«vON/Hf:AOS/NTIUL» Jl I HF » 1 b> > , T 10 F. ( 1 b , 7 ) ,NDfiM , JOA K(50 ,2) ,
1UAMC Sb,3 i ,OF. LhHl i>C»» SP1LL< IC'U) f S PL HA H » i OU)
TAPt :>
INDA
1 N 0 «
IND^
INDA
IN PA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDft
INDA
INDA
INOA
INOA
INDft
INDA
INDfi
INDA
INOA
INOA
INDA
I N n A
INDA
1
2
3
<4
5
6
7
ID
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
27
28
2V
11
Sb
36
4U
4)
1?
<*3
Ml
*»s
46
<47
<*8
M9
C^Q
bl
b2
i>3
5M
55
3h
-179-
-------
* *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
s^
c
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT,10UTCT,J1N(1U>,JOUT<1J),KSCRAT(5>
TYPE DESIGNATIONS
DATA ASTER*,BLANK /4H**#*,4H /
OPTION SWITCH, 1SWCHU)
ISWCH(l)
IF 1, WILL CALL TIDAL
COEFFICIENTS PROGRAM
ISHCHC2)
IF I, SUPPRFSSCS CHANNEL AND
NOOAL INFORMATION PRINT
STEP ONE
INITIALIZATION
Hb-b
RHINO N20
N2U ASSIGNED IN RECEIV
STFP TWO
TITLFJS, GENERAL CONTROL DATA,
AND JUNCTION AND CHANNEL INFOR-
MATION
SEAD TYPE A CARDS
(FlhST TWO CARDS CONTAIN HEAD-
INGS FOR HYDRODYNAMICS, SECOND
TWO CARDS CONTAIN HEADINGS
C0« IDENTIFICATION OF STORMWATER
INFORMATION)
ica
1C2
WEADAM )
WKITf (IM6,1Q2
FORMAT (1H1,
ALPHA
TITLE
) ALPHA
1SA4/ 1H
15A4///)
REAL TYPE B CARDS
SWITCH INFORMATION
i: 4
NTIDE-'J
NDANTD
READ (Nt5, iu4)
FORMAT(315)
NriDE,NDA'1,ISWCH«2»
READ TYPE C CARDS
CONTROL INFORMATION
kLAU (N5.1Q6I
1
6 > -jTCYCtPE:RIOO,QHvT,OELT ,T/ERO,NHPRT ,NQPRT,NPLT»EVAP
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOft
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
57
5«
59
bO
61
b?
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
7«»
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
37
38
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
101
1U2
103
104
105
106
107
ne
ir)9
110
111
112
113
114
-180-
-------
* * -t *
IDb FOhM'.MT (IS,4Fb..l, 31S, *FS. ), *] j) 1NDA 115
IPFJ-'TD - PERIOD * 1.1 INOA 1 11,
IilINT = CilNT*3b;:~.*l.l IKDA 117
IDELT - UELT « U.1 INDA 11B
NUCYC=CIPFRID * 361:0 ) /I QIM T INPA 119
NHCYC = lOlNf/iDELT INDA 1 2H
N1NT = I!PER10*3bU;U/IOELT INHA 121
NPOEL = INlNT'bU !/ltHl INDA 122
C INOA 123
C REAL- TYPF D CARDS INOA 124
C PRECIPITATION IS READ AT THIS INDA 125
C POINT, RATE IS INCHES PER HOUR, INOA 12b
C TIME IS REAP IN MINUTES FROM INDA 127
C START OF STCRM INOA 128
C INDA 129
00 ZiO N~1,H1G INDA 13U
KAIN(N)=0.0 INDA 131
INTIHE(N)=D.O INOA 132
210 CONTINUE INDA 133
IF t INRAIN.Ew.J) GO TO 215 INDA 134
WEAO{Nb,113> (KAINU! ,INTIMEC11 ,1=1 ,I*KAIN.» INOA 13b
11U FORMAT (BF10.D) INDft 13fa
215 CONTINUE INDA 137
DELTO=DELT*FLOAT (NHCYO INDA i 38
WKITE(N6 ,112) NTCYC INDA 13V
112 FORMAT I15HGUAYS S IMUL ATED , I <*I INDA 1MD
114 FORMAT «29HOWATER QUALITY CYCLES PL* DAY,141 INOA 142
WRITE (K!6,11M MHCYC INOA 143
lib FORMAT (43HD1NTEGRAT10W CYCLES PER WA1ER QUALITY CYCLE,14) INDA 14M
hRITE «fc,li6! DLLT INUA 14S
118 FORMAT (inHGLENGTH OF IMEBhAlION STEP IS,Ff,.l-,6H SECONDS! INDA 146
WRITE I6,U'0» TZERO INDA 147
1?H FORMAT (13HOIMT1AL TIME ,Ffa. ?»6H HOURS) INDA 148
«kIT£ (Nfc ,122 )Ei/AP INDA 149
122 FORMAT U BHUEVAPOHATION R ATE ,F5 . I , 1 3jH HH PER MONTH! INDA 1 bO
WkITt (Nb, 124 !WIND,WDJR INDA 1!>1
1?4 FORMAT (1 b'HQWINi) VELO Cl T Y ,F 5 .0 ,22 H M/S WIND DIR ECTIOW ,Fb.O, 1 9H DEINDA 152
WfclTL {N6,128> N'JSWRT INOA 1 b'4
128 FORMAT I26HCWKITC CYCLE STARTS AT THE,I4,11H TIME CYCLE//! TWO* Ibb
IF (1NRAIN.LE.J! GO 1C 22b INDA 156
130 FO^MAT(75HORAl;il IN HH PER HOUR, AND TIME IN MINUTES, MEASURED INDA 1 &«'
1FKOM STAFVT OF STORM/ J INDB 1 b9
i^RITE (N6,131> INDA 1 bQ
131 FORMAT (1 SX,8H ^,H/HR»,2X,8H Ml NU TE S, 4 X , 8H MM/MR. ,2X ,&H MINUTES, INDA Ibl
14X,£H ^H/HR.,?X,8H MI MUTES, MX ,8 H KM/HR . , 2X. ,8H MINU TES,4X ,8H MM/lNDA 162
2 MR•,2X«8H MINUTES/I INOA 163
DO 220 I - 1,10Q,5 INDA 164
L ~ MINP(I •» 4,11/0! INDA Ibb
^«IT;I tu6,i?2i i? L, uuiNiji »ir.ri*iE (ji, J-I,L» INDA i&b
1'2 FUR"AT(I4,4H TJ , I 3 , It'FI 1 . 3 > INOA 167
-181-
-------
* *
222
225
133
230
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
INIIME (I »-IN 11 ML m*bD.
GO TO 230
CONTINUE
WRITE (Nb»133J
FORMAT I23HQNO PRECIPITATION
CONTINUE
INPUT)
MEAD TYPE E CARDS
JUNCTION NUMBERS FOR DETAILED
PRINTOUT
READ(N5,13«») C JPRTII) ,lrl,NHPRT I
13<» FORMATI8I1Q)
WRITt»N6 ,136 1NHPHT, ( JPRT(I) .Irl.NHPRTl
136 FORMAT i 32HOPR IN T t f» OUTPUT AT THE FOLLOWING, I 3 ,1 OH JUNCTIONS,//
1 (10X.16I6M
READ TYPE F CARDS
CHANNEL NUMBERS FOR DETAILED
PRIfcTOUT
RE AD IN 5, 13H1 tCPRTII) ,1 = 1
WRITEINb,138)Ki)PRT , < CPPT f I ) , 1-1 , NOPRT I
138 FORMATC//15X ,21HANO FOR THE FULL OWINGI 3,9H CHANNELS// f 1DX , 81 10 M
READ TYPE G CARDS
WLAD THE JUNCTION NUMBERS IF
PLOTS ARE REQUESTED, OTHCRyiSE
SKIP THIS READ
IF (NPLT.NE.U) REAUCNS, 1 SH ) ( JPL T f N> ,N = 1 i NPL T J
COfvTROLLED OR FORCED NODES
IF «NTIDE.EQ.01 GO TO 560
00 55C 1TIOE=1,N11DE
RE AD (Nb, 140) JTIDEIT1IDE) » KO ,M , MAX I T ,NCHT ID
1«*0 FORMAT (5 15)
RtAD IN5,1*»2> CTTU ) ,VYf I) ,1 = 1 ,NI)
1M2 FORMAT C8F1Q.G)
CALL TIDCFU MOE ,KO,NI ,MAX1T,K'CHTIDI
SSO CONTINUE
560 CONTINUE
IFCNDAM.EQ.G ) GO TO 580
WRITt INb,lMl )
l«il FC»NAT<31H1DAH LOCATIONS AND COEFF 1C ILNTS/ <4HO^O. , 3X ,
18HUPSTREAH,3X,10HDOWtiSTRE6M,2X,l 1HCOEFF ICIENT ,<»X »6HHEIGHT *
25X,8HEXPOKENT/8Xt5HJUNC. ,7X , 5H JUNC ./ / )
DO t7D IDAH=1,NDAM
K't :AOIN5,i«»3) JDAMdrjAM, I) ,JOAHIIDAM,2 ) , DAM i ID AH , 1 ) ,OA Ml ID AM ,2 ) ,
1DAM( 1DAM,31
1<4J FORM AT 121 5, 3F 13. U»
WRITE (M6,l«*5 ) IDAM.JDAHIIOAM,! ), JDAH(10AM,2l ,
,I3,6X,1>,9X,I3,6X,F10.4,2X,F1U.U, 2X,PIC.*)
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
170
171
172
173
m
175
176
in
178
179
180
181
182
18i
184
IBS
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
2U1
202
2U3
204
205
2Q6
2U7
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
2 20
221
222
223
-182-
-------
* * *
570 CONTINUE
580 CONTINUE
150
C
C
C
C
00 150 J=l,50
X(J>=0.0
YU!=O.D
166
620
640
C
C
C
C
172
READ CARDS FOR
NODAL INFORMATION
00 620 1=1,50
READ CNS, 166) J.HEAQ, SURF ,QF1 ,QF2 ,DT,CF ,X1 f Yl
FORMAT CIS, F5.0,F 10. D,2F5.0,2F 10. 0,20 X.-3P2F5.D1
IFtJ.GT.501 60 TO 640
1F(J.GT.NJ)NJ=J
H(J)-HEAO
ASCJ)=SURF
QIN(J)=QF1
QINSTIJI=OF1
QOU(J)=QF2
X(J)=X1
YtJ»=Vl
DEP(J1=DT
COFt J)=CF
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
NC-0
READ CARDS FOR
CHANNEL INFORMATION
DO 660 1=1, IOC
READ(N5,i72)N,CMTE^P(K > ,K = 1 ,4 I , A LEN, WIDTH, RAD ,COEF,
FORMATC5I5,5F1Q.OI
IF IN. GT. 2251 GO TO 670
IF
NJUNC(N,2>3MAXOJNTEMP(1> ,NTEMP(2»
DO 6<»3 J = l,8
IF
NCHAN(K, J}=t^C
GO TO 660
TO 648
IND* 225
INDA 226
INDA 227
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
IND*
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INOA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
INDA
229
230
231
232
233
234
236
237
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
-183-
-------
* * *
H-NCHANIK,J)
BIH)=B(M)«4IDTH
RCM)=RAD
A(M)ZR(M )*BIMI
AMM1-COEF
655
660
670
170
GO TO 660
CALL TRIANCNTEHPIl ),NTEMP(2» ,N TEMP (31 ,NTEMPt«m
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
IF (ISWCHI2).LU.l) GO TO 674
WRITE(N6,170>
FORMATdlOHlCHANNEL LENGTH WIDTH AREA
ELLV
IMJ
C
)
OI
GO
(Ml
AK(N»-U,
TO 683
1Y BOTTOM
2 NUMBER
3 DN)/1
674 CONTINUE
00 695 N=1,N
IF (AKINJ.LE
IF-0
DO b82 J=lt8
IF UPOINTtK, Jl.EG.U)
IFUPOINTCK, J)
WRITEJN6,168 )
168 FORMAT (8H CHANNE L » I«» ,8H
1LWO OR NEGATIVE WIDTH)
NCHANIK, Jli-0
681
682
683
JUNCTIONS AT
(SQ M>
018
ENDS
COEF.
MANNING
MAX INT /
(M/SI
GO TO 682
NE*NJUNC(Nt2)I GO
TO 681
JOINING,I4»4H ANDtI'*t38H DELETED DUE TO
NJUNCiN, H
GO TO 695
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
681
685
6t7
00
IFC1POINTIK,JI.EQ.NJUNC«N,1>» GO TO 687
IF (IPCIMIK, JI.EO.Q) GO TO 685
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
IPOINTCK,JI=NJUNCCNf11
NCHANIK,J)-M
CONTINUE
IMUMCH e N » -K JUNC (N , 2 ) * M JUNC t M , 1 > *1 Q.OU
UO 688 J-l.NOPRT
IF(CPRT(Jl.NE.MUMCHCNI > GO TO 688
bO TO 693
688 CONTINUE
693 CONTINUE
NJ1 = WJUNC(N, 1 I
(H, 21
INDA 280
1NDA 281
INDA 282
INDA 283
INDA 284
INDA 285
INDA 286
INDA 287 ,
INDA 288
INDA 289
INDA 29U
INDA 291
INDA 292
VELOCITINDA 293
70HINDA 29t
1M - POSINDA 295
INDA 296
INDA 297
INDA 298
INDA 299
INDA 3UO
INDA 301
INDA 302
INDA 303
INDA 30<»
INDA 305
INDA 306
ZINDA 307
INDA 308
INDA 309
INDA 310
INDA 311
INDA 312
INDA 313
INDA 3m
INDA 315
INDA 316
INDA 317
INDA 318
INDA 319
INDA 320
INDA 321
INOA 322
INDA 323
INOA 324
INDA 325
INDA 326
INDA 327
INDA 328
INDA 329
INDA 330
INDA 331
INOA 332
INDA 333
INDA 3314
-184-
-------
4 * * *
IFITF.GT.G.O ) TF-0.7
C
C
C
C
IFITF.LT.ltELTI XMXrASTERK
1FIISUCHI2I.EC.l) GO TQ 695
rfRITElN6,171 ) N,LEN (N1,8(M) ,A(N >,AK (N»,VIN> , R (N > ,1 N JUNC IN ,K >,
1 K=l,2),TF,XMK
171 FORMATtl5,Fl l.t)tF8.0,-3PF10.UtOPF9.3,Fia.2tF13.1tI19tI6,F16.Uf
1A1)
695 CONTINUE
IF IISUCHC2I.EQ.l) GO TC 698
tfRITE(N6»182 >
182 FORMATI121H1JUNCTION INITIAL HEAD SURFACE AREA INPUT
1PUT CHANNELS ENTERING JUNCTION CO
2TES/122H NUMBER CM) I SO M 1 ICU M/S1 I
31 X
ATOT^O.
00 696 J=1,NJ
ATOT=ATOT*AS(J1
WRITE4N6 ,181 I J,HiJ) ,AS(J),OIN(J>,QOU(JJ,(NCHANtJfKI»K-1,8),
1 X(J),Y(J)
181 FORM AT 11 7,F13.21F15.2,2F10.2,110t716 ,F10.1,F7.1»
696 CONTINUE
URITFI6,190) ATOT
190 FORMATCE2U.6J
698 CONTINUE
rfRITE (N6,1921 TITLE
192 FORMAT ( 1H015A1,15A1 J
STORE SYSTEM DATA ON QUALI
OUTPUT TAPE
^RITE (N2D1 TITLL,ALKHAtNJ,NC»NQCYC,DELTtt»((NCHANIJ,KI,K=1,8
1 ASIJl,OEP(J),J=1,NJ>,(LENIN »,(NJUNC(N,K),K = 1,2>,N=1,NC>,
2 NT10E,( JTIDEC1I ,M=.l ,N TIDE » ,NO AM , ( I JDAPIIMtNl »N = 1 ,2 I ,M=1, NDAM
RETURN
END
INDA 335
INOA 336
INDA 337
INDA 338
INDA 339
INDA 310
U,1X, INDA 311
INDA 312
INDA 313
INDA 311
INDA 315
OUTINDA 316
OROINAINDA 31?
CU M/SINOA 318
Y/JINDA 319
INDA 350
INDA 351
INDA 352
INDA 353
INDA 351
INDA 355
INDA 356
INOA 357
INOA 35B
INDA 359
INDA 36U
INDA 361
INDA 362
INDA 363
INDA 361
INDA 365
INDA 366
INDA 367
INDA 368
INDA 36^»
INDA 370
TY
>,
-185-
-------
* *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
r
C
c
c
SUUPOUTINE. PRTOUT
C
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
PRINTING OUTPUT ROUTINE
HYDRODYNAMICS PROGRAM
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
CONTROL
COMMON /CONTR/ N5,N6,N2CtN21 , NTCYC ,NQCYC,NHCYC, NT.NQSWRT
It DELTQ.DELT,FZERO, ISWCHC10I
GENERAL
COMMON ALPHAC30), NJ.K'C, ICYC,KCYC,NCYC, WINO,WDIR ,EVAP
1, PRECP<5Q),NEXIT
JUNCTIONS
COMMON Hdi.1), HN(IO), HT(10», HBARdGI, HAVEdO), NCHAN(10,8»,
1 IPOINTI 10,8) , ASddl, VOLilQ), X(lD), Y(10», DEP(ID),
2 COFllO), QlMllOlt OUU(lfl), QINSTUO), Q1NBARI1Q)V
3 COUBARI10)
CHANNELS
COMMON LFNriUJ, NJUN C ( 10,!' 1 , BtlQI, P«1Q), A(1Q), AT(IO), AK(10J,
1
2
1
2
QdOJ, QB/VRdH), QAVtdOl, V4101, VTUD), VBARtlO),
FWINDdO), NUMCHdCI, NTEMP(B), NCLOSdHI, RBARdOJ
PRINTOUT AND PLOTTING
COMMON NPRT, IPRT, NHPRT, JPKT(IU), PRTHI250,101, NQPRT, CPRTC101
PRTV»25U,10», PRTO(25I),10>, IOUHd2J, ICOLC10J, LTIME.
NPLT, NPDELt JPLT(IO), HPLTilOl
STAGE-TIME COEFFICIENTS
COMMON YY(501 ,TT<50> , AA dO ) ,XX ( 10 I , SXX d 0 , Hi) , SXY ( 10 )
1,A1,A2,A3,A4,AS,A6,A 7.PERIOD,JGW
STORMyATER
COMMON TITLE!JO I,MJ3W,QE(20,2 >*JSW(20)
2 t HA Itv (l.)L > , INT I ME d 00 ) , IUWA IN , JI30UND t.?U » , JJBCSJN
TAPES
COMMON /TAPES/ INCUT,IOUTCT,JINi 10),JUUTd0> ,NSCRATC5 I
TYPL DESIGNATIONS
INTEGER CPRT
KtlAL LEN
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
t
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PR TO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
1
2
3
n
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1M
15
16
17
IB
19
20
25
26
27
32
33
3
-------
» * * *
100 FORMAT dhl, laAl/ 1H , 15M///J
00 220 l=l,NMP^T,b
dBlTL (0,1001 ALPHA
WRITE (N6,112I TITLE
102 FORMATdMO, 3JA<+)
WRITE (N»,,IQ
WRITE (6, 108) JPRTd) , JPRTd* 11 ,JPRT( 1*2) ,JPRTd +
1 JPRTd* 5)
IPS FORMAT (1BO,23X,9H JUNCTION , 15 , I 3H JUNCTION,
1N,I5,13H JUNCTION, 15, 13H JUNCTION, 15 , 1 3H
2,I5/12H HOUR, 1<»X,100H HEADJM1
3 HEADIMI HEADCM) HEADIM)
T=TZERO-3ELT*FLOAT(NHCYC>
LT = HINOd*5,NHPRT»
DO 220 Lrl.LTirtE
T=T*OELT*FLOAT - IA8SCN JUMC(NX,2»I
230 CONTINUE
JRlTE(6,im J (IDUMICI tIC=l»12l
lit FOWKAT (1HO,18X,6 ( 1 OH CHANNEL , I 3 , 1«* ) /
2.6<,lliHCYC)
HOUR-T/3b[i:).
2ia . PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
D VELOCITIES PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
1ME HISTO RPR TO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTC
VEL. FLOW PRTO
OW VEL.,/,2<«X PRTO
M/S CU M/S MPRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
PRTO
61
62
63
6U
65
66
67
ftA
oo
f.a
o ~
7U
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
SO
61
82
33
8
-------
* * * * PRTO 115
IF INEXIT.CQ.il STOP 333J ™'" J"
DU 260 I = l.NHPKT "™ *
PkTHU.l) = PfcTHlLTI.IE.II ppl" }}'
260 CONTINUE l"!° !
DO 28G
PRTQC1.II = PRTOCLTIHt.n
HRTVtl.I) = PRTV(LTIME,I»
280
IF (JSWiL ),L = 1
118 FORMAT133H1HYDROGRAPH INPUT NODES TO SYSTEM, // <6X ,10 1 10 > I PRTO 127
PRTO 128
PRTO 129
-188-
-------
* * * * #
PROGRAM QUALT
C
C
C
C
C
C
COUPON IZZZC92851
C
C
C
COMMON/TAP£S/INCNT,IOUTCT,JINI10),JOUTtlO),NSCRATI5>
INTEGER
BASIN MOOEL TEST PROGRAM
COMMON BLOCKS TO ZERO ARRAYS
TAPE FILES
C
C
C
C
C
C
ZERO ARRAYS
DO 3DO l-lt9265
300 IZZZ
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* *
SUBROUTINE LOOPQL
QUALITY CYCLE LOOP
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
HEAL MADD,LEN
DIMENSION TT 12 », OK IT HI 1001, WITH ( 100,2»,SUMQ< 100 > ,CONSTI«» I
1 ,QADDUDO),ADD( 10D,2I ,IFLG( 15}
3ENEHAL AND CONTROL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT,IOUTCT,JIN(10),JQUT(101,NSCRAT(5 I
BLANK COMMON
COMMON JGfc/,NTC,NQCYC ,DEL TQ,QE,QF,ALPHA(301 , TITLSWI3Q >,1COLI10)
1 , IS WC HI 101, XR( ill, XMEU5,11 ),XM Fill ),XMEOU5,11 )
2 ,N5,Nb,NlO,N2J,M3iJ,N4Q,NSTART,XRQlM 15,11)
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCHANI5'J,d) , QIM(SO), COU(5(J), VOLI50), VOLOtSO),
X ASC50)
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJU^C (100 ,2 ) , 0 (1 JO ) , LEN(IUO), UUUO)
. SOURCE DATA
COMHON NJSW,JSW(20)
l.MJSUtISU(10a>,CTf11,100,2),INSTM
QUALITY
COMMON KCON, C2I11), CSfl5,ll), ICON(111 , CfSOtill* SUMC«50,11I,
1
2
1
2
3
<4
b
b
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP 18
LOOP 19
LOOP 20
LOOP 21
LOOP 22
LOOP 23
LOOP 24
LOOP 27
LOOiP 28
LOOP 29
LOOP 31
LOOP 32
LOOP 33
LOOP S4
LOOP 35
LOOP 36
LOOP 37
LOOP 38
1
2
3
H
5
6
7
3
10
11
12
13
l
-------
* *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* *
DAM DATA
COMMON /DAM/ NOAM,JDAH I 50,2\,SPILL(1OQI
TIDAL JUNCTION DATA
COMMON /TIDAL/ NT IDE,JTIUCII5 I
PHYSICAL DATA
COMMON /PHYS/ DEP«50), ELEV(50> , R<100 )
TITLING
COMMON /LBL/ CUUTU2,<»)
COMMON /ST1/ T
IFUNSTH.GE.I.) GO TO
DO «4 11:1,15
IFLG(II1=G
CONTINUE
DO 5 J=1,NJ
awlTHf J)-C.Q
GO TO 190
TC 1 90
TDELTt
7T91
5 CONTINUE
}J IF(INSTM.NE.O)
N21-JIN(INCNT)
1F1N21.EQ.O) GO
REWIND N21
RLAD IN2U TITEL
WRITE (6,7093) TIT EL
7J93 FORMAT (1H1 ,20AM/1H ,2UA<4)
READCN21) NSTEHS ,MJSWtNCOM
TV = T2ERO/3600.
WRITE(6,7t91 ) NSIEPS,KJSW,NCONfTOELl,TZ,TAREA
rORMAT(34HO DATA TRANSMITTED FROM INPUT FILE/
.29H NUMbtR OF STEPS =,!!>/
NUMBER OF INPUT POINTS =,15/
NUMBEP OF CONSTITUENTS z,15/
TIME INCREMENT
INITIAL TI?1E
TOTAL AREA
«LAUCN21) (ISW(L)fL=.t,MJSW)
WRITE (6,6!J01) ( ISW ( L) ,L -i ,K JSW )
FURM4T(3CHQINPUT POINTS ARC LISTED BELO»*,/
1 UGX ,iai ID))
H'LADtN21 i TTCJ).(ADDtLtll»yiTM(L,llfCCT(KfLfHtK =
1 ,L=1
1.
29H
29H
-F1U.2,4H
SECS/
HRS/
H SQ KILOMETERS)
(SCI
TT(1 ) : TTC1 ) * fZTRO
TH-TTJ 1 J /360U.
rfMTf. (6,6533)
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
56
57
•>&
59
60
61
62
63
6
-------
* * * *
6503 FORMATI34HITOTAL
1 bCHOTIME
2 bOH
3 30H
4 5UH HOURS
5 5CH
6 30H
SOURCE LOADS
JUNCTION
TOS
FKOM DATA FILE/
SULFATtS TOTAL F£
ALUMINUM
TSS
6M/SEC
LOOP Hi
GM/SEC
GM/SEC
MANGANESEt
GM/SEC
GM/SEC GM/SEC
6502
190
WRITE 16 ,6502 I (TH,ISU«L)*(CTCK,L ,1),K = 1,NCON),L=1.MJSWI
FORMATI1H ,F5.2,IV,IX,11F10.3I
READtN21 I TTt2>,(AOD,UITH(Lf2>»,K=l,ll>
1 tL=lvMJSV>
TT<2> - TT<2) * T2ERO
TH=TT»2)/36DO.
WRITEC6,65.02 > I T H, IS U t L ) , < CT < K ,L
NINREC=2
12 = 2
TIME =
TTP=TIME
CONTINUE
C
c
C
C
C
C
MAIK LOOP
DO 5^8 ICYC=1,NUCYC
READ(MO) NQ,ta
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
126
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
1 J7
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
-192-
-------
* * * *
12-11
IF(NINMEC-NSTCPS» 2025,2030,2030
2025 RLADCN21) TTII2l,(AOOIL,I2l,HlTH(L,I21,(ClCK,L,I21,K:lflll
1 ,L=1,MJSW1
TTII2I - TTU2I + TZLRO
TH=TTII21/3600.
JRITEl 6,65031
WRIT El 6,6502 1 tTH,ISUILI,tCT(K,L , 121,K=1,NCON1,L=l,MJSU)
N1NREC=NINREC*1
GO TO 2012
2H30 mi2! = TTIIl 1 * T T 111 »-T T( 12 1
00 2035 L=1,MJSW
DO 2035 K=l,NCON
2035 CTIK,L,I2»=0.
GO TO 2012
2040 DO 2045 L-1,MJS*
J=ISUILI
QWITHIJI-IQyiTH(J»*WlTHIL,Ill*(TIME-TTPIl/OELTQ
9ADOIJUIQADOIJI *AOD (L ,1 1 )*( TIME -T TP > I/DEL TO
00 2045 K-l.KCON
KK;MAPSCKIK»
2045 MADDIJ,K} = tMADD(J,K1*CT(KK,L,111 *{TIME-TIP)I/DELTQ
IFCNJSW.EO.O 1 30 10 «»<«7Q
00 <**4CO K-l.KCJN
IF (TIHE.LE.TEfK I > GO TO
TEOIKI = TE(K)
00 «»4»40 L =1 ,KJSW
CE(K ,L,1 ) - CE (K,L,2 >
CONTINUE
C
C
C
WE AD (N5, 4 320) (CONST
READ TIME AND LOADINS RATE
,I=l,4>,TE(Kt,tCE(K,L,2),L=l,
4320
J TEPIKI = TEfK1/3600.
WRIT{:iN6,4380I (CONST I 11,I = 1,41,TEPIK1
4380 FORMAT(1HO,10X,23H ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF ,4A4,4H AT ,F5.2,
1 17H HOURS FROM START,/,1HO,10X,
2 120HJUNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION MASS R
3UNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION HASS RATE ,/
yRITE (N6,43<»0}( JSWCL1, CE I K ,L, 2 1 ,L =1 «N JSU »
4340 FORMATI1H ,6 (15, F 11 . J I 1
COMTINUE
00 4460 I. =1 ,NJSW
J = JSW(L >
SLOPMLI^ICE (K,L,21-CE(K,L,I )1/(TE (K 1-TE04K1 »
WADD(J,K>=CSPIN(J,K1« « CE »K,L,I 1-»SLOPE IL 1*1 TIME-TEO (K 111
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
C
C
LOOP 109
LOOP 1 ?n
LOOP 171
LOOP 172
LOOP 173
LOOP 174
LOOP 175
LOOP 176
LOOP 177
LOOP 17ft
LOOP 179
LOOP 180
LOOP 181
LOOP 182
LOOP 183
LOOP 184
LOOP 185
LOOP 186
LOOP 187
LOOP 188
LOOP 189
LOOP 190
LOOP 191
LOOP 192
LOOP 193
LOOP 194
LOOP 195
LOOP 196
LOOP 197
LOOP 198
LOOP 199
LOOP 200
LOOP 201
LOOP 202
LOOP 203
LOOP 204
LOOP 205
LOOP 206
LOOP 2U7
LOOP 208
LOOP 209
ATE JLOOP 210
,1HOI LOOP 211
LOOP 212
LOOP 213
LOOP 214
LOOP 215
LOOP 216
LOOP 217
LOOP 218
LOOP 219
LOOP 220
LOOP 221
LOOP 222
LOOP 223
-193-
-------
* * *
c
c
c
208
209
210
211
215
218
220
221
223
227
230
235
236
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
SET BOUNDARY
CONDITIONS
CONCENTRATION
1FCNTIDE .LE.OI GO TO 236
00 235 I11DE-I.NTIDE
JGWrjTIDEIITIDE)
00 230 KC-l.KCON
JFtIFLGIITlDEI-1 » 208,210,220
DO 209 KCC=1,KCON
XME(ITIDE,KCC>rl .
XMEO(ITIDE,KCCI-0.
IFCQINIJGW)) 211,211,215
IF(COIHJGW)) 215,215,221
MADDCJGW.KCJ - ( XR QD < II 1 OE ,KC > /XMt ( I TIDE ,KC I *XMEO ( ITIDE,KCl
*CSIlTIDE,KC»-C = 3.
XME« IT1DE,KC 1 =XMt 1 1 T IDE ,KC I + QOUI JGW>
XMEO -0.0
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
COMTINUE
COMPUTE CONCENTRATION CHANGES
00 265 J=1,NJ
IF(NCHANfJf1 ) .£Q.O)
GO TO 265
00 245 KC=1,KCON
OCDT(J,KC1-0.
ADVECTIVE MOVEMENT IN CHANNELS
00 260 K-1,8
N-NCHfiN(J,KJ
IF(K.EO.O> GO TO 260
JL-NJUNC(N,1>
JH^NJUNC(N,2 J
IF ( IJ.EO.JL » .AMD. IQ(N».&F..a. M 60 TO 260
1F( ( J.EO.JH) .A^O.IQI NULE.U. > ) GO TO 260
SUrtC ( JJ=SUMQ ( JMABSCUINI J
00 2i>0 KC = 1,KCON
DCDT(J,Kri=OCOTIJ,KC>*Q«N»*ICIJL,KCI-C(JH,KC)»
CONTINUE
CONT IK-UE
CONTINUE
IF
-------
* * *
c
c
c
c
c
SOURCE CONTRIBUTION
UPDATE CONCENTRATION AND CHLCK
DEPLETION
DO 200 J-l.NJ
IF/VOL C(J,KC>=D.C
270 CONTINUE
280 CONTINUE
c
c
c
295
30U
c
c
c
c
c
320
C
C
c
DECAY ANO REAERATION
IF(ISWCH(«4) .NE .1 > GO TO 300
CALL ADJUST
00 295 J=1,NJ
IFINCHANt J,l 1 .E.U.UI GO TO 295
CALL LINKITIHE,J1
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
ACCUMULATE MINIMUM, MAXIMUM,
AND MEAN CONCENTRATIONS
DO 32C J=1,MJ
DO 32U KC^l.KCON
IF (CHINt J,KC I.GT.C(J,KCH CHIN { J ,KC 1 =C (J ,KC I
IF(C1AXC J.KC ).LT.C( J,KC> ) CM AX {J ,KC I =C « J ,KC I
SUMC(J,KCJ=SUMCtJ,KC)«CIJ»KC)
IF (HQPRT.EG.C) GO TO 1500
IF (NSTPWT.LT.ITCPRT ) GO TO <*SQO
IF tLGCPRT.LT.NQCTO!) GO TO 4500
CALL QPRINT
CONTINUE
tNO QUALITY CYCLE LOOP
CONTINUE
RETURN
END
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
LOOP
279
280
281
282
283
28M
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
29«»
295
296
297
298
299
300
3U1
302
303
3D<«
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
31U
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
32<4
-195-
-------
* * *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
SUBROUTINE DAMSISUMQ)
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
/•»
C
C
c
DIMENSION SUMCflQCn
COMPUTES ADVECTION OF
CONCENTRATION DUE TO FLOW
OVER DAMS
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
INTERNAL VARIABLES
BLANK COMMON
COMMON JGW,NTC,NOCYC,DELTQ,QE,QF,ALPHAJ30>,TITLSW1301,ICOLII0»
1 ,ISWCMilU>,XR(ll>,XHE,XMEO(15»ll>
2 ,N5,N6tN10,N2U,M3n,N«»OfNSTART,XRCUC15,ll I
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCHAN<50,a», QINI50), COU(50), VOLI5D), VOLO(SO),
X AS I 50)
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJUMCCiaO ,2) , UUOD). LENUGJO), UUUO)
SOURCE DATA
COUPON NJSW,JSJ(2D)
1 ,MJSW,ISWC10JI,CTt11,100,2),INSTM
QUALITY
COMMON KCON, €2(111, CS(I5,11>, ICON(ll), CISC,111, SUMC(5a,ll),
1 CMAXC50,1U, CMIN(5J,111, MADDI50,11», OCDT (50,11) ,
2 CEtll,5u,£>. Tt(ll), TEP(ll), SLOPE(20», CSPIN150,11>,
3 TfcOCl 1 )
LINKAGE AND DECAY COEFFICIENTS
COMMON /DECAY/ MAPC13I, MODCHL» MODNIT, MODP , MOD02, MODBOD,
1
2
3
5
b
MODCOL, KODMET, SUNRIS, SUNSET, AV6LIT, EXCOEF,
TLMPCi>OJ, 5«AZE(bO), RRESH, 6TCOEF, COEFtSO,8l,
CONSTN, CONSTP, AZIMCH, PINCH, 02INCH, 3ENTHI5D),
SATLII, THETA(b), RAMMI50), RTRITEIbDJ, RTRATEISOr
RPtSUJ, RtAER«5U>, OEOXY(5QJ, RCOLIF(SO),
«rtETAH5Dl, A(IUO), B(IJQ), CCHANtlOOl, MAPBCKC13I
DAM DATA
CU.1MUN /UAP4/ NJAM,JDAM(blJ,2l,SPlLLI10ti>
TIDAL JUNCTION DATA
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
»
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
1
2
3
i*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
25
26
28
2V
30
31
32
33
3<*
35
39
ft ji
t| CL
!>3
SH
55
56
57
5ft
-196-
-------
*
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* * *
COMMON /TIDAL/ NI IDE,JT10EC15J
PHYSICAL DATA
COMMON /PHVS/ aEP(SQ), ELE V I 5(1 I , R t 100 I
TITLlNfa
COMMON /LBL/ COUTI12.4J
COMMON /STl/ TITELCMJ)
IF(KDAM.EC.OJ tfLTUPN
IF hO DAMS, RETURN TO LOOPQL
COMPUTE ADVECTION
liO 30 KDAM-1
JUP-JDAMtKOAM,i)
1FIJDOWN.GT.NJ> GO To 50
SUMQCJDOwM=SU?10< JOOWN >•»SPILL « JDOWNI
DO 20 KC-1,KCCM
IFtMAPdCK (KC I.'JE.V I GO TO 10
HOT=TEMP(JUP)
OSAT = U4 .fc5-((J.3393 *HOT>
1 +(C.U (16969 * HOT* HOT)
C
C
C
3 *( { 1 .Q-(Q.C)QOOOb<5 7*ELEV( JUP )/;J. 3C<«8 ) I** 5. 16 7)
FACTOK = 1 .L+C .3oa«*U .0-»0 .0»«6 *HOT )*A(3StELLV ( JUP )-LLEV I JDO JN I »
CDAI^^I (FACTOft-l.U)*OSA T+C( JUP,KC ) )/F ACTOR
UCOT ( JDO«JNfKC)-DCDT( JDOWM, KC >* SP ILL I JDOWN >* ( CD AM -C «JDOyN ,KC» )
GO TO 20
10 CONTINUE
JCOT (JDOWN,KC)-DCDT( JCOIrfN.KC ) +SP ILL ( JCOWNJ *< C t JUP ,KC ) -CIJDOy N,KC )
?0 CONTINUE
30 CONTINUE
RETURN TO LOOPQL
END
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
OAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
OAMS
OAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
>OAMS
DAMS
OAMS
DAMS
DAMS
DAMS
OAMS
OAMS
59
6(1
61
62
63
65
06
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
7<4
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
B2
83
81
35
86
87
88
89
9U
91
92
93
9<«
95
9fc,
97
98
99
100
101
-197-
-------
* * * *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
L1NKCTIME,J)
C
c
c
c
c
c
COMPUTES PARAMETER DECAY AND
LINKAGES BETWEEN PARAMETERS
iPEtlFICATION STATEMENTS
BLANK COMMON
GENERAL AMP CONTROL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT,IOUTCT,JIN I 10),JOUT(101,fcSCRAT( 5>
BLANK COMMON
COMMON JGW,NTC,NQCYC ,DELTQ,OE,QF , ALPHA ( 30 >, TIT LSW 130 ) .ICOLUUI
1 ,1 SUCH!1C!,XRt11),XME(15,11 I,XMFC11 ) ,XMEOC15.il)
2 ,N5fNfo,Nltlf N2Ji,N3n,N«4n,NSTART,XRQUC 15,11>
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCKAN(5Q,8>, i)IM(50), OOU(SQ>V VOLISO>, VOLOIbD1»
X AS I 50)
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJU'JCUOO ,2), Q (1 00 ) , LEN<100), U ( KID )
SOURCE DATA
COMMON
1,MJSW,ISWC100),CTt11,iaO,2),lNSTM
QUALITY
COMMON KCONt C, RTRATE(i>0)» RPCliD), REAERC50),
ULOXYI5D1, »COLIFI5U»t RMCTAL(5Q>t CO^STN,
CONSTH, A2IMCH, PINCH, 02INCH, BENTH(bO), SATL1T»
THET4JB), COEriSCiv8It AUOD), PCIOC), CCHANC100I,
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
QP1I
QP1I
QP1I
QP1I
QP1I
OP1I
QPII
QP1I
QPII
OP 11
QPII
QPII
QPII
1
1
QPII
OP1I
QPH
1
QPII
QPII
QPII
OP 11
QPII
QPII
QPII
OP1I
1
1
1
1
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2«»
27
28
29
31
32
33
3«t
35
36
37
38
«»2
13
44
45
Hb
47
48
-198-
-------
C
c
C
c
c
c
* *
7 MAPBCKU3)
COMMON /PHYS/ i)£PIVM, ELCVI511-), W ( J OC I
INITIALIZE VARIABLES
1F(K .Mt.n»
K=MAPiJ»
IFIH .NE.OI
IFIK.NE.U)
K=MAP(5)
If (X .NE.O J
K=MAPtb)
IF(K.fcE..3J
K=MAP<7>
IF IK. NE.O }
PHOS-CIJ,KI
COLIFrCU.KI
AMH=f,( J,K)
TR1TL-C(J,KJ
)=Ct J,i
IF (HOU«.LT .SUN^ISI GO TO 1U
IFiHOUR.GT.SU^SETI GO TO IQ
AHBLIT-1 .57*AVQLI1/PHOTO*SIN 13.1 Ml 59 /PHOTO* (HOUR -12. 0 + PHOTO/ 2 .0) >
(iO TO 2U
AM3LIT=C.C
DEATH^OEATH+RESP
20 LATIN!C=EXCOEF*(ELEtf( JI+DHMJM
ALPHAQ=AMBLIT/SATLIT
SUN-1.U/EXPCALPHA1 »-i .J/tXPJ6LHHAO J
IF {MODNIT.EO.D FACTN ~ 1 .U / I (CON S7N/ ( AMM + TRI TE *T WA TE ) ) * 1 .0 >
IF
IF UMOnwir.tt •! > .ANU. CH'JDP.CQ .Ul > bWOLIM : FACT?^
IF <.II«ODP»£0.1 » . AND. iMOUNIT.Eg.C >) b^OLlM - FACTP
oK-JlrTH = .?. 7J e*GrcOEF*riOT*'sUN*Gf3
0*4
ob
66
67
68
i>9
70
7^
77
78
79
HO
IF MonniT.Eo.-n
GO ro
-199-
-------
c
c
c
C
C
C
c
r*
C
* * * *
ULLAMM-RAMM( J J * AMK*DELQA Y
AMM=AMM-OELAMH
IFUMM.LE.D.JI AHM-O.D
DELN02-KTRITEIJJ*1«ITL*DCLOAY
TR1TE = TR1TE-»UELAMM-DLLN02
IFtTRITE.LE.O.U) TRITE=Q.U
1RATE=(1.C-RTRATL( J»*DELnAY»*TRATE»DELN02
IF(TRATE.LE.O.U) TRATE=0.0
IF tMODCHL.EQ.Cn GO TO 1U
UPTAKE=AZlNCH*tiWOtaTH*CHLORA*DELDAy
IF(UPTAK£.6T.IAMH«TRATE) » TR HE - TR I IE-UPTAKE + AMM *THA TE
IF (TRITE .LE.O.UJ TRITE^O.O
IF (UPTAKE. GT.AMM ) TR AT E=TRATE>UP TAKE*AHM
IF(TrtATE.LE.O.J) TRATE^O.O
AMH^AMH-UPTAKE
IF (AMM.LE.O.OI AHMrQ .0
PHOSPHOROUS
IF (MODP.EQ.l* PHOS - ( 1 .D-RP ( J »*OELOA Y J*PHOS
IF < (MODP.EQ.U.AND. (MODCHL.EC.l » »
X PHOS = PHJS-PINCH*G«OMTH*CHLORA*DELDAY
IF(FHCS.LE.O.OI PHOSrO.D
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
TO 50
*HOTI
*HOT*HOT)
2 -97*ELEV( J)/D.3U«*S) J**5.167»
JODT- REAER( JJ*(OSA1-02J
1 -DEOXYJ J**BOD
2 -BENTH< JI/lf.LEV( JJ*OEP( J»)
IF (MODNIT.EQ.U DODT = OODT -( 3. HI^DEL AMM+ 1 . 11*DELN02 I/DELOAY
IF (MODCHL.EQ.H OODT = OOUT +0 2INCH« CGWOWTH-RESP I*CHLORA
02=02*OODT*DELOAY
IF(C2.LE .C.O J 02=C.O
3IO-CHEHICAL OXYGEN OEHAND
50 IF ( (MOOBCO.F.U.1 > .OR . (M0002. EQ . 1 I)
X BOD - ( l.U-OEOX Y(J»*DELDAY><«BOD
IF (BOD. LE.^. 01 800=0.0
COMPLETE CHLOROPHYLL A
COMPUTATIONS
,0*(GROyrH-DEATHJ*OELDAYl*CHLORA
IF IMG002.EC.C) GO
OSAT-J11. 65-10. 3393
c
c
if (HODCHL.EO.l)
IFfCHLOPA.LE.1.0)
CHLORA - (1
CHLORA-O.tJ
C
C
COLIFORMS
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
82
83
84
85
86
87
80
89
91
92
93
9«»
95
96
97
98
99
100
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
103
lot
105
106
108
109
110
111
112
113
11«4
IF (MODCOL.EO.l> COLIF - (1,0-RCOL IF(JI*UELDAYI*COL1F
IF ICOLIF .L^.n.QJ COLiFrQ.O
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
117
116
119
120
121
123
12H
125
126
127
129
HO
131
132
LINK 1J1*
-200-
-------
* * *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
METALLIC ION
IF 1MOUME7.EQ.1) ETAL = C1 .U-RME T AL (Jl *DELDAY I *E TAL
IFIETAL.LE.O.OI ETAL=C.O
STORE NEW VALUES OF VARIABLES
IF(K.NE.'J>
K=MAPI3)
IF(K.NE.O>
K=MAP(4)
IF(K.NE.01
K-MAPI5J
IK(K.NE.rJ)
K-MAP16)
IffK.NE.Di
K=:HAPI?>
1FIK.KE.G)
K=HAP«81
1FIK.NE.Q1
K=HAPI91
1F1K.NE.U)
K-MftPHl I
IF(K.NE.O)
rtETURN
END
CIJ,K)ZPHOS
CIJ,KI=COLIF
CtJ,K»-AMM
CIJ,KI=TRITE
CIJ,KI=1RAIE
C«J,K)-BOD
CIJ,K)rCHLORA
CIJ,K»=02
CIJ,K|= ETAL
RETURN TO LOOPQL
LINK
LIMK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
J35
136
137
139
140
141
112
143
11
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* *
SUBROUTINE SWCUAL
RECEIVING WATER QUALITY
C
C
C
C
C
C
SPECIFICATION SI .TEMENTS
REAL MADO.LEN
GENERAL AND CONTROL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT,1OUTCT,J1NI10),JOUTC10J,NSCRATI 51
BLANK COMMON
COMMON JGt»,NTC,NQCYC,DELTQ,QE,QF ,ALPHA(30»,TITLSWI30 »,ICOLU J»
1 ,ISWCHI10),XR<1U,XME<15,11),XMF<111,XMEO<15,11)
2 ,N5,N6,Nia,N2J,N30,N4Q,NSTART,XRQDI 15,111
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCHANC5J,8J, QINISGI, COUfBQI, VOLI5Q), VOLOI501,
X AS I SO J
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJU^CUOO,2) , QUOD), LENUfJG), UUOOJ
SOURCE DATA
COMMON NJSU, JS*J( 2C)
l,MJSW,ISWUOGJ,CTni,10Q,2),INSTM
QUALITY
COMMON KCON, C2U1), CS(15,I1>» ICON(ll), Ct5D,lll, SUMCC50,lllt
1
2
7
1
5
b
C
C
CMAXtBC.lll, CMIN(5J,11»» MADDI50,llt, UCDT«50,ll)t
CCni«5j»Jlf TEU1), TEP(ll), SLOPE (201, CSPI N IbO ,11 > ,
TEOC1I>
PRINTING
COMMON NCP9T ,1 rCPPT,LCCPRT ,NSTPR T,NOCTOT , I SK IP ,MSTPR T ,N(PRT ,KPRT
«
LINKAGE AND DECAY COEFFICIENTS
/ KAPdU, MODCHL, MOUNIT, MODP, MOD02, MOOBOD,
MODCOL, MODMET, SUNRIS, SUNSET, AVGLIT, EXCOEF,
TEPPI50), GrfAZE(5n>, RNESH, GTCOEF, COEF(5D,8I,
COKSTN, CONSTP, AZINCH, PINCH, 02INCH, BENTHtoOl,
SATLIT, THETA(6>, RAMMI50), RTRITEI50I, RTRATEI50*
Rf»(50>, REAER(SU), DEOXY(5G», RCOL1FC5UI,
RHETAL«3D), AHOO), BdUO), CCHAN(J')Q», MAPBCKC13I
0AM DATA
SWQU
SWOU
swou
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
t
SWQU
SWQU
1
2
3
<4
5
b
7
8
1U
11
12
13
11
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
25
26
27
29
3D
31
32
33
3<4
35
36
to
41
42
<»3
«»4
45
46
54
55
-202-
-------
* * *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
COMMON /DAM/ NOAM,JOAM5G,2» ,SPILLUQC»
TIDAL JUNCTION DATA
COMMON /TIDAL/ NTIOErJTIDE<15»
PHYSICAL DATA
COMMON /PHYS/ DEPC50), ELEVC501, RIIDUI
TITLING
SWQU
swou
swou
SUQU
swou
SUQU
SUQU
SWOU
SUQU
SUQU
SWQU
SUQU
SUQU
SUQU
SUQU
CALL 1NQUAL
00 751 NT#3=NSTAR1,NTC
REWIND NIC
'4STPRT - NTAG
CALL TO SUBROUTINE 1NQUAL
MAIN QUALITY LOOP
COMMON /LBL/ COUT<12,4)
N20 = NSCRAT(11
INSTMrQ
MOOP = 0
MODCOL = D
MOONIT = C
MODBOD = t!
MOOCHL - 0
MOD02 ~ 0
HODMET = 0
SUQU
SUOU
SUQU
SWQU
SUOU
SUQU
SUQU
SUQU
SUOU
SWQU
SWOU
SUQU
CALL TO QUALITY CYCLE SUBROUTINESUQU
SUQU
SUQU
SWQU
: swou
: PHIKT DAY AVERAGE CQNCENTRATIONSSWQU
: SWQU
00 359 J : 1,NJ SWQU
i)0 359 KC-l.KCON SWQU
359 SUMC
-------
* * *
101
41CU
321
110
111
112
113
114
115
3?2
WkITEI6,101) ALPHA
FORMAT (1H1, lbA4/ 1H , 15A4///X)
WRITE 16,321) NTAG,KC,(COUT(KC,II),II=1,4>,ICOL
WK1TEJN6,41001 TULSW
FORMAT « lriO,15A'l,15A4 )
FOWKAT(1HO,10X,38HAVERAGC JUNCTION CONCENTRATIONS DURING,
21H TIDAL OR TIME CYCLE ,I4,21H, CONSTITUENT NUMBER «
I3,5X,4A4//9X,10I1'J/14H JUNCTIONS.!
UO 110 I=1,NJ,1Q
L~MINC(I*9,NJ»
WRITE (6,111) 1,L,(SUMC(J.KC),J-I,L)
FORMAT(I4,5H TO , I 3 ,1 X,10C10.4J
1F(ISWCH(2).E0.1) GO TO 322
WRITE (6,112)
FORMAT(1 HO,50Xt8HKAXIMUMS/11H JUNCTION)
DO 113 I-1,NJ,IQ
L = MlNtm+9,NJl
WRITE (6,1111 I,L,(CHAX(J,KC),J-I,L»
WRITE (6,114)
FORPAT tlHC,5UX,SHHINIMUMS/HH JUNCTION)
00 115 I-1,NJ,1U
L-MINO(I+9,NJ)
WRITE (6,111) I,L,(CH1N(J,KC),J-I,L»
CONTINUE
SWQU 111
C
C
C
RESET SUMS FOR NEXT DAY CYCLE
322G
323
CONTINUE
DO 323 J=1,NJ
VOLUIJ)=VOL(J)
UO 323 KC-1,KC3N
CKAXCJ,KC)=C.
CMINtJ,KC»=C(J,KC)
SUMC(J,KC)-C.5*C(J,KCJ
IF (NTAG.TQ.NTC) GO TO
REMIND NIG
C
C
C
1SWCH 10 SET BY N30 READ-IN
,QIWIJ) ,QOU( J),
IF (ISWCHUQ).EW.l) GO TO
DO 4120 I-l.NOCYC
READ (N20) NU, (Q(N),U(N),R(N),N=lfNC),
1 ELEV(J),SPILL(J>,J=1VNJ1
WRITE(Nin) NQ,(Q(Ml,UtN)tR(N),N=11NC ) ,(VOL(J),QIN(J),QOU(J),
J ELEtf(J) ,SPILL(J1,J-1,NJ)
4l?[) CONTINUE
WLWIND NIG
414U CONTINUE
C
C
END OF PAIN OO-IOOP
7fl CONT1MJL
IF (ISwCH{3)
EU.1> GO TO U16G
swou
SWQU
SUOU
SWOU
SUOU
SWQU
SWOU
swou
SWOU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWOU
SWOU
SWOU
SWOU
SWOU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWOU
SWQU
SWQU
SWQU
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
13<4
135
136
137
138
139
110
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
-204-
-------
* * * *
C SWOU 169
C RESULT OPTION REMOVED TEMPORARY SWOU 17U
C SWOU 171
i»160 CONTINUE SWQU 172
RETURN SWQU 173
END SWOU 174
-205-
-------
* *
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* *
SUBROUTINE QP&INT
c
c
c
PRIM ROUTINE FOR QUALITY
CYCLE OUTPUT.
SPECIFICATION STATEHENTS
REAL MADO.LEN
GENEHAL AND CONTROL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT , 10UTCT f JIN C 10 I , JOUT 1 10 I ,NSCRAT I 5 I
BLANK COMMON
COMMON JGyfNTC,NQCYC,DELTOfQE,QF .ALPHA (301, TITLSy 1301 tICOL 11 0>
1 , ISWCH<1D»,XRU11,XMEU5,11),XMF<11) ,XM£Otl5,ll }
2 ,N5,N6,Nia,N2J,N30»N40tNSTART ,XRQOI 15*11)
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCHANC5Q,8», QIN(50), QOU(5Q), VOLfSOl, VOLO(SO),
X AS(SO)
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJUMCtriO,2>, Q (1 00 > , LENdOQJ, UCiaO»
SOURCE DATA
COMMON NJS4,JS'4(2C>
l,HJSW,ISU(100>fCTCIl ,100,2),1NSTM
QUALITY
COMMON KCON, C ,?< 11 > , CStl5,ll>v ICONdll, Ct50,lU» SUMC(50,11I,
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
t.
CMAXC5Q,11I, CMIN(5U,il), MADDCbC.llJ, OCDT150,11 I»
CE(11,50,2I, TEUll, TEPU1), SLOPLC20I, CSPI N «50 ,11» ,
TEOdll
PRIMING
COMMON NQPRT , I TCPRT ,LCCP«T ,Ni»TPR T ,NQCTQT , 1SH IP ,MSTPR T ,NPRT ,K PRT
LINKAGE AND DECAY COEFFICIENTS
COMMON /DECAY/ MAP(13I, MO'JCHL , MOONIT, MOOP, M0002, MODBOD,
MODCOL, HODMET, SUNRIS, SUNSET, AVGLIF, EXCOEF,
TEMPJ'jOJ, GRAZEJ50), RRESP, GTCOEF, COE.FCSO»8t,
CONSTN, CONSTP, AZINCH, PINCH, 02INCH, 8ENTH«50),
SATLIT, THETAC8), RAMMISOJ, RTRITEC50J, PTRATEC50I
R^I50>, RC4CR(5U>, UHOXYJ50I, RCOLIF(5C»,
RHETALIbD), A d OC > , B dOO ) , CCHANdOQI, MAPBCKC13J
QPR1
OPRI
OPRI
QPRI
OPRI
OPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRT
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
OPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21
27
28
29
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
-206-
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
DAM IJATA
COMMON /DAM/ NOAM , JD AM I 5Q ,2 J ,SPI LL t 1 DC 1
TIDAL JUNCTION DATA
COMMON /TIDAL/ NT IDE , JT IDE ( 1 S »
PHYSICAL DA1A
COMMON /PHYS/ UEPI50>, ELEVI50), RJ10C)
TITLING
COMMON /LBL/ COUFI12,«l)
IF (ISKIP. NE.NiiPRTJ GO TO 502U
NQCTOT = NQCTOT * 1
FORMAT C1HC15AU,1:>A<»)
*RITE«N6,101 I ALPHA
WRITE IN6tmUG) riTLSW
FORMAT I1H1, 15A4/ 1H , 15AH///1
yRITEtN6,321 I *STP*T ,MSTPR T
FORMAT («43HOJUKCT ION CONCENTRATIONS, DURING TIME CYCL E ,!<» , 1 5H
1ITY CYCLEtlU ,37H. UNITS ARE M6/L , EXCEPT 10**6 MPN/L t
210.HCOL1FORMS.//1
^RITEIN6,325 I ( (COJT (KfJ)fJ=l,2),K = l ,KCON)
FORM AT (9HC! JUNCTION, 1 H2X,2At J I
WRITEIN6 ,326 > ( (COUT (K ,J I , J = 3, 4 I ,K = 1 ,KCONI
FORMATUH ,8 X , 111 2X , 2A m /1H )
00 322 J=I,NJ
IrfRITE !N6tlll > Jt«CCJ,Kl,K-l,KCON)
FORMATdH , Ib,2X,llFi0.3>
CONTINUE
ISKIP - I
GO TO 501C
502(1 CONTINUE
ISKIP = ISKIP * 1
CONTINUE
RETURN
LND
1C1
321
325
326
111
322
010
OPR1
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
OPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
(QUALQPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
QPRI
Sb
57
58
59
60
fal
62
63
6<*
65
66
68
69
70
71
72
73
7<»
75
76
81
82
83
8*»
85
86
87
88
89
9D
91
92
93
9«»
95
96
97
98
99
-207-
-------
* * *
c
c
c
c
c
c
SUBROUTINE
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
r*
w
c
QUALITY OAT* INPUT ROUTINE
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
HEAL MADO.LEN
DIMENSION VARI13I ,CONSrm>
GENERAL AND CONTROL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT f IOUTCT , JlNt 10 » , JOUT ( 1 J I ,NSCRA T (5 I
BLANK COMMON '
COMMON JGh!,NTC,NQCYC ,DELTQ,QL,QF , ALP HA I 301 »TITLS W 130 I ,ICOL 1 1 01
1 , ISWCHt 1C) , XRUD.XME ( 1'5,11 > .XMM11 1,XMEO< 15*11 )
2 ,N5,N6,Nia,N2U,N3Q,NHO,NSTART ,XRQDI 15,111
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCHAN(5Q,S), QINtSO), OOU(50», VOLfSO), VOLCH50),
X AStSOl
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJUNCUOQ»2», UUUQ), LEN(1UD», UtlOOl
SOURCE DATA
COMMON NJSW, JS-.M20)
l.NJSrf, ISWUOinfCTtll , 100,21 , IN STM
QUALITY
COMMON KCON, C2U1I, CSU5,1U, ICONfll), C t 50 , 1 1 1 , SUNCtSO.UI,
1 CMAX«SC,11>» CMlN(5a,ll»t MAOOC5Q,11 t , OCDT(50,I11,
2 Ctf 11 »5(J,2I, TEC11), TEPtll), SLOPtf20l» CSPIM 1 50 ,1 1 > »
3 TCO(ll)
PRINTING
COMHON NQPRT.ITCPRT, LGCPRT ,NSTPP T tNOCTOT , I SKIP ,M STPR T ,NPHT ,K PRT
LINKAGE AWO DECAY COEFFICIENTS
COMMON /OrCAY/ MAPC13), MODCHL , MODNIT, MODP, MOD02, MODBOD,
1
L.
c
bS
6
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU 11
INOU 12
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
MODCOL, MODMET, SUNtfIS, SUNSET, AVGLIT, EXCOEF,
TCMP(SUIV GRAZEI5JJ, RRESP, GTCOEF, COEF(50,8»,
CuNbTN, CONSTP, AZINCH, PINCH, 02IKCH, 8ENTH15Q),
SATLIT, THEfA(8l, RAKMC50), RTRITCISOI, RTRATE.CS01
K(M50), REACR(5u), DEOXY(SC), RCOLIFtSO),
kMFUL(50>, AI1U01* B (1'JQ ) , CCHAN(130>, MAPBCKdJ)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
INQU 26
INQU 27
INQU 28
30
31
32
33
31
35
36
37
INOU m
INQU 42
INQU M3
INQU W
INQU <»5
INQU 16
INQU 17
INQU 55
-208-
-------
* * * *
C 0AM DATA
C
COMMON /0AM/ N9AM, JD AM 50,2 > ,SPI LL U OC I
C
C TIDAL JUNCTION DATA
C
COMMON /TIDAL/ NUDE ,JTIDLt 1 5)
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
PHYSICAL DATA
COMMON /PHYS/ DEPI50I, ELEVC5D), RUOOI
TITLING
COMMON /LBL/ COUTI12,4>
COMMON/CARD/ TITLE 14, 131
DATA
NAME/MHREAE/
DATA DECLARATIONS
SET-UP 1/0 DATA SETS
READ N1G,N3G,N40. N10 SHOULD BE
DRUM OR DISC STORAGE. N30 AND
N4Q SHOULD BE MAGNETIC TAPE,
IF USED.
NiO = NSCRAT (21
N3Q = NSCRATC3I
K4Q - NSCHAT (4 >
REWIND N10
MEtfIND N2D
KEAD(N5,555) 1SWCH
if-5 FORMAT C1DI5I
IFC1SWCHCI J.fcG.l I REWIND N30
IF(ISWCK(3).tt.U REWIND N40
UU 11 1=1,10
ICOLU 1 = 1
11 CONTINUE
WR1TEIN6,6) ICOL»ISWCH
6 FORMATI16H1SWITCH SETTINGS/I 101101 I
INITIALIZATION
00 51DO J-1,50
GRAZCJ J) =0.0
BENTHf J)-0.0
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INQU
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
INOU 67
INQU 68
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU 1UO
INQU 101
INQU 102
INQU 103
INQU 10*»
INQU 105
INQU 107
INQU 108
INQU 109
INOU 110
69
70
71
72
73
71
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
36
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
-209-
-------
* * *
5050
5100
5110
5120
5130
5110
5150
C
C
C
C
RTRITEt JJ-.3.0
RTRATE ( Jl-J.O
rtP ( J) = 0.0
DEOXYIJjrC.O
REAERt JI-0.0
RCOLIFt J)=O.Q
MMETALC Jl-0.0
00 5050 1=1.8
COEF (J.I »=0.0
CONTINUE
DO 5100 K-1,11
CIJ,K1=0.0
MAOO=C.O
CONTINUE
00 512'J 1=1,15
DO 5120 K=l,ll
CS(I ,K »=0.0
CO^JTINUE
00 5130 N=l,10a
ACN)=0.0
B(N) =0.0
CCHANJNJ =0.0
CONTINUE
DO 5150 1=1, b
TECI) =0.0
TEP< I i=0 .0
DO 5110 L=1,2C
CE(I ,L.l 1=0.0
Ctd.L ,21=0.0
CONTINUE
CONT INUE
READ CN20)
1 AS(J>,ULP
2 NTIDE,(JT
TITLS
IJ1,J=
INQU
INOU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INOU
NETWORK DATA ARE READ FROM INQU
RECEIVING WATER QUANTITY PROGRAMINQU
INQU
W,ALPHA,NJ,NC»NOCYC,DELTQ,(CNCHANIJ,K t,K = 1,8 ) ,
lfNIJ),(LEN(N), ,Krl ,<>> (N = 1 ,MC) ,
TK-1 ,NT10E),NDAM ,< (JDAM(M.N) ,N = 1,2),M-1,NOAM J
C
C
FLOt DATA ARE TRANSFERRED
TO FAST STORAGE, DRUrt OR DISC.
00 90 I=1,NOCYC
READ (f NQ, t«(KJ,a«NJ , R ( N ) ,N= 1, NC ) ,(VOL(J» ,OINCJ) ,GOU(JI,
1 ELEV(J) ,SPILL,J=i.rNJ»
wPITt"IN10» NQ.1U
1 ELEVJJI .SPILL(J
I CONTINUE
REWIND MO
IF(ISWCH(l).NE.l» GO TO 95
RESTART OPTION TEMPORARILY
-------
*
c
c
* *
95
101
<»10Q
C
C
c
11 OH
1102
110<4
1105
1106
1110
4200
snio
«
READ 1
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
WRITE
FORMAT
MTOTAL
WRITE
FORMAT
1
2
DO 601
N5.555
IN6,10
1 1H1,
IN6, NOCY
I33HONUMBER 0
(N6,ll
05) NTC
FCPRT,
H
sw
<4)
t
vJUNC
NQPK'T,
15A«»/ 1H
TION
CHANNEL
C
F
I15HONUMBER OF
|N6,11
06) OELT
Q
I«»5HOLE?
9H10 FORMAT ( 4 A<4 , m , 1 2F S. f) )
1FIINTEG.NE.UI GO TO 8080
IFtJCHECK.NE.NJI STOP 11
JCHECKrO
UO 8010 KCC-1,13
GO TO 8050
IFCCONSTU ) .EQ.TITLE II ,KCC»>
8'JJJO CONTINUE
STOP 12
BQSO IFdVAR.ME.b) GO TO
IF ( CONST* 2 ).£Q. TITLE (2.6M
fcHSl IF (I VAR.EC.12I GO TO 8031
KCON-KCON+I
IVAR =
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
134
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
2U*t
2U5
206
207
208
2U9
210
211
212
213
2m
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
-211-
-------
* * *
8061
6062
8063
8065
6066
8067
8168
8:169
6070
1
MAPbCK (KCCNIrlVAW
uO TO (8031,8061 ,8'J6, 8063,6061, 8065,8067, 3068,8069, 8030, 8070,
I 8031,81<*0>,IVrtR
IF (MODP.EQ.l) STOP 21
MODP - 1
THETAI4) - VARU)
uO TO 8030
IF JMODCOL.EQ.U S !OP 22
HOOCOL - I
THETAI71 : VARC1 »
60 TO 8030
THETAU) r VAR<1I
30 TO 8066
THETA(2I - VARd >
GO TO 8066
THETA<3» - VARCM
HOONIT = 1
NITCHK=NITCHK+IVAR
GO TO 8030
IF tMODBOD.EQ.il STOP 23
MODfaOD = 1
THETA(6>=VAR(1 )
GO TO 8U30
IF (MODCHL.EQ.U STOP 2*4
.100CHL = 1
SUNR1S - VARC11
SUNSET - VAR12)
AVGLIT = VAR(3>
SATLIT = VARC4)
CXCOEF = VARC5I
GTCOEF = VAR(6>
HRESP - VAR(7l
CONSTN - VARC8I
CONSTP - VAR(9)
AZINCH = VARUi'JI
PINCH - VAR(H>
02INCH = VARU2J
(iO TO 8030
IF (M0002.EQ.1) STOP 25
M0002 = 1
THETA(S) - VAP(l)
GO TO 8030
IF (HOOMET.EQ.I) STOP 26
10DMET = 1
THETAI8>=VARI1 )
SO TO 30 3D
JCHECK-MAXOI JCHECK.IUTEG)
JTT-IKTEG
IF UVAR.rt.12I GO TO B10Q
CIJTT,KCON)=VAt?(lI
MADDt JTT ,KCON)=VAR«2 )
uO TO (8110, 8D71 ,8392,8093,8091, 8095, «096, 8097,8098, 8110,80991,
IVAft
3)
INQU 22«»
INOU225
INQU 226
INOU 227
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU 2<42
INOU 243
INQU 2
-------
* * *
8092
8093
809 <4
8095
BQ96
8097
8098
8099
S100
*
GO TO 811U
KCOLIF(JTT:
GO TO 8110
6120
6130
C
C
C
C
9H20
60 TO 3110
RTRITE( JTT)=VAttf 31
GO TO 8110
RTHATE( JTTI=VA*(3)
60 TO 811C
OEOXY(JTTI=VAR(31
GO TO 8110
GRAZE (JTU-VAR<3)
GO TO 8110
BENTH(JTT1=VAR(3)
GO TO 8111
RMETALCJTTlrVARI 31
bO TO 8110
TEMPt JTT)=VAR(1)
GO TO 8031
IF(NTIDE.EQ.O) GO TO 6030
00 6120 KTIOE=1,NTIDE
IF ( JTT.EQ.JTIDEUTTDEII GO TO ai3o
CONTINUE
GO TO 8030
CS(KTIOE,KCON)::VAR(1 I
XWOD(KTIDE,KCO,>J)-VAR (5 »
GO TO 80 3G
IF i (MODN1T.EC.1 J.ANO. CNITCHK.NE .15*1 STOP 31
IF ( CM0002.EQ.ll . A^O . ( rtOOBOO .E Q .OH STOP 32
LIST INITIALIZATION
AND BOUNDARY DATA
WRITE (N6.902D)
FORMAT f 32HOCO>-JSTITUENTS BEING MODELED ARE-*
IOUT=D
JO 8160 IVAR-1,11
IF(MAPCIVAR) .EO.O) GO TO 8160
i)0 8150 1 = 1,1
COUT (MAPCUT ,1) = TITl£tI
B15U CONTINUE
«16Q CONTINUE
IOUTrIOUT+1
UO c 161 1 = 1,1
COUT C10UTtI»-TITLEU,12>
t-161 CONTINUE
4HITE (N6,903DI ((COUTU,
9J30 FORMAT ( 1H3, b( <4A1,1X I/1H
J» , J=l , II , 1 = 1 f KCON»
t6(t*A1t1XI)
KORHAT (<*3HMMT1AL CONCENTRATIONS , BY
WKITL «N6, 90501 t (COUT (K , Jl , J=l » 2 I ,K =1 ,10UT )
FORMAT (9HD JUNCTION, 12 (2X,,£A
INQU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
279
280
281
2d2
283
281
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
291
295
296
297
298
299
3QO
301
302
303
301
305
JUNCTION!
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
308
309
310
311
312
313
311
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
321
325
326
327
326
329
330
331
332
333
-213-
-------
* * *
9060
7010
9070
9080
=3 ,<4 ) ,K- 1 , IOU T >
I
=1 ,KCON ) , TEMP IJ I
7020
9160
J,IMADrMJ,KI,K =
TO 7050
7030
9170
7040
705U
9120
9130
7,160
9110
WRITE (N6,9G6GJ ( (COUT I K , J) ,.
FORMAT (lh ,8X,12IZX ,2A4)/1M
DO 7010 J-1,NJ
WRITE (N6,9C7C) J,(C(J,K)
CONTINUE
FORMAT <1H ,I6,2X,12F10.3>
WRITE (N6.9D8G)
FORMAT (44H1BACKGROUND MASS LOADING (MG/L), BY JUNCTION)
WRITE (N6.9050) C(COUTIK,J),J=l,2),K=1,KCON>
WRITE (N6,906CI ( (CO IJT (K , J ) , J-3,4 ) ,K-1 ,KCOM)
DO 7020 J=1,NJ
WRITE CN6,90701
CONTINUE
IF (NTIDE.EQ.OI GO
WRITE (N6,916C)
FORMAT OOHlCONCENfRATIONS IMG/L> OF OCEAN SINKS, BY JUNCTION)
WRITE (N6,9(,5fc» I ( COUT ( K , J) , J- 1 , 21 ,K -1 ,KCON )
WRITE (N6,906C) ((COUT(K,J),J = 3,4),K-1,KCOfO
DO 7030 M-l.NTIDE
J3JTIDE«M)
WRITE (N6,907C> J,(CSIM,K),K=1,KCON)
CONTINUE
JRITE (N6.917D)
FORMAT (45H1EXCHANGE RATIOS FOR OCEAN SINKS, BY JUNCTION)
WRITE (N6,90SO) I>
IF (MODCHL.EQ.O* GO TO 8165
WRITE (N6,9150) SUNRIS,SUNSET,AVGlIT ,SATLIT , EXCOEF,GTCOEF,RRESP
1 CONSFN,CONSTP
FORMAT (34HOPAPAMF.TE9S FOR CHLOROPHYLL A ARE-/1H ,5X,
AiSHSUNRISE -,F5.2,
HOURS ,
DlfcH HOURS
C35MAWEWAGE DAILY
/1H ,
SOLAR RADIATION
&HCHSOLAR RADIAIIO* SATURATION
H18H LAfJGLEYS/DAY /1H ,
I 35HEXTl!SiCTION COCFF1CIENT
JJ««H I/METERS /1H
-,F5.2,
3,F5.2,
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
JUINOU
INOU
INQU
TESINQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
3314
335
336
337
338
339
3«*0
316
3«»7
348
349
350
351
352
353
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
376
377
378
379
3 80
381
382
381
384
385
386
387
338
-214-
-------
*##-.»
K3fjHTEMPLRATURl COEFFICIENT OF GROWTH 3,F5.2,
L24H ,
M4UHTLMPE*«TUH£ COEFFICIENT OF RESPIRATION =,F5.2/1H
N35HMICHAELIS CONSTANT FOH N1TKOGEN =,F5.2,
024H *ICROG«AM ' ,B ( ICHAN J ,CCHAN( ICHAN I
S TO0 41
IF
00 bl7Q N^l,NC
^EAD «N5, 92001
IF(IO.NE.NAME>
6170 CONTINUE
WRITE (N6,9210)
92DQ FORMAT «AM,bX,Ia, 3FIO. 01
9210 FORMAT ( 67H1 CHANNEL CHARACTERISTICS
lCOEFFICIEKTS/36HnCHANNEL A
WRITt (N6,9220) ( N ,4 (N ) ,Fi ( M 1 ,CCH AN (N 1
9220 FORMAT liH , 15 ,F 12. 3 ,2^ I J. 3 >
FOR COMPUTATION OF REAERATION
B C/1H 1
= 1 ,NC »
C
C
C
C
ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCE
INPUTS FRO* CARDS.
IF(NJSW.EC.01 GO TO 818C
»/360U.
«j(hlTC(N6 ,9 25 ill ( COMS rCI»,I=lfiH,TEPIKI
FOrtM AT (!HC;f10X,2T,h ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF ,'I/U,«*H AT ,F5.2,
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INOU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
INQU
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
402
403
404
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
418
419
420
421
422
423
42'4
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
4 37
438
439
440
441
442
443
-215-
-------
* * * *
1 17H HOURS FR04 SiART , /,1HQ,1UX ,
2 12QHJUNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION MASS RATE J
3UNCTION MASS KATC JUNCTION MASS RATE JUNCTION MASS RATE t1HQ)
WKITECN6 ,9260) ( JSU I L) ,CE I K « L,<> I ,L = 1 (N JSU )
S260 FORMATUH ,6(15,F11.2»
8171 CONTINUE
C
C
C
SET-UP DATA FOR SWQUAL
6180 NSTART -1
KPUT : 1
MOCTOT = 1
ISKIP - 1
DO 230 J=ltNJ
VOLD(J»-VOL«J>
DO 230 KC r l.KCON
CSPINIJ,KC)=MAOD
-------
* *
SUBROUTINE ADJUST
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
SPECIFICATION STATEMENTS
C
C
c
c
c
c.
GENERAL AND CONTROL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT,IOUTCT,JIN I 10 I,JOUTJ10).NSCRAT ( 5 I
BLANK COHMON
COMMON JGlN,NTC,NQCYC ,DELTQ,QE,QF ,ALPHA I 30 I,TITLSU1301,ICOLd0 I
1 ,ISUCHIlDltXRtll I,X ME (15, 11 I.XMFdl ),XMEOd5,ll I
2 ,N5fN6tN10,N2tl,N3f],N4Q,NSTART,XKQDC 15,111
JUNCTIONS
COMMON NJ, NCHAN(50,8I, jINfSQl, QOU(50I, VOLI50), VOLaiSDI,
X ASC5O
CHANNELS
COMMON NC, NJUUCdOa,2l, Q d DC! I , LCNdGO), UdODJ
SOURCE DATA
COMMON NJSW,JS*<20»
1 ,MJSW,ISWdOO),CTdl ,iaO,2»,lNSTM
QUALITY
COMMON KCC*, C2dl>, CS(15,llt, ICONdU, DUMH Yl 50, 11 > ,
X SUKCI5C,11>,
1 CMAX<50,11>, CHINI5U,11I, MADD«50,lllf DCDTI5U,111,
2 CEdl,50,2), TEdl), TEPC1H, SLOPH20), CSPI N 450 , 11) ,
3 TEOCllI
PRINTING
COMMON NQPRT,ITCPRT,LOCPRT,NSTPRT,NQCTOT,ISKIP.MSTPRT,NPRT,KPRT
LINKAGE AND DECAY COEFFICIENTS
COMMON /DECAY/ MAP(13>, .-100CHL, MCDM1, MODP, MOD02, KODBOD,
1 MODCOL, ^ODMET, SUNRIS, SUNSET, AVGLIT, EXCOEF,
2 TLMP(5U), G?AZE(50)f HRESP, GTCOEF, COEF(50,8>,
3 CONSTN, CONST!', AZINCH, PINCH, 02INCH, BENTHC50),
4 SATLIT, THETA<8», CDE F20 < 50 ,8 » ,
5 AdOD), BdaOl, Cd3G>, MAPBCMd3)
COMKON /PHYS/ JEPCSO), ELEVIbO), RdUL)
UI MEMS ION DEOX/(bU», ft-EAERISO*, DCNOMI50)
LUUI VALE MCE (DilOXYd I ,COEF Cl ,b ) I , t i*E AEH 11 » ,COf.FI 1,5 > I
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
QP1I
QP1I
QP1I
QPII
QP1I
OP 11
OP1I
OP 11
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
1
1
QPII
GPU
QPII
1
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
1
1
1
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
QPII
1
1
1
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
1
2
3
-------
*
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* * *
PHYSICAL DATA
10
COMPUTE CHANNEL RE AERATION
COEFFICIENTS AND PREPARE FOR
WEIGHTED AVERAGES AT NODES
DO 10 Jrl.50
OENOHIJ 1=0.0
REAER1 J)=0.0
CONTINUE
DO 20 N=1,NC
iFlR(N) .LE. 0.0! GOTO 20
CHANKR= AINJ*I ( 3 .280 fl* AB S < U ( N > » )*»B=RCAER(J1 J+ADDESD
»*EAER«J2>=REAER.EQ.UI GO TO 60
1F
1FIDEPTH .LL. J.0» GOTO bt)
IF (DEPTH.LT.2.'44 ) DE OX Y( Jl =DEOXY ( J )/ ( IOEPTH/2.4M )**0.13*l )
UO bO K-1,3
GO TO <30,30,3U»30t«»0,'»Ot30,30),K
IFITHETA(KJ.EC.O.O) GO TO 50
COEF (J,K >rCOEF20(J,K 1*(THETA IK ) **(TE MP ( J > -20 .0 ) I
oO TO 50
IF (THETA (Kl.EQ.O.O) GO TO 50
COCF < J»K jrCOEF«J,KJ* (THETA(K}**C TEMP t J J-20 .0 ) 1
CONTINUE
CONTINUE
ENO
ADJU 21
ADJU 22
ADJU 2
ADJU 27
ADJU 28
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
ADJU
30
31
32
33
33A
34
3S
36
37
38
39
40
Ml
<»2
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
-------
* * V
SUBROUTINE RECUAL
COMMON /TAPES/ INCNT,1OUTCT,JINI 10J,JOUT11U».KSCkAT ( b) RECE 2
DIMENSION QU4M2ltQUAL<2),AMAMEI<«> RECE 3
DATA CUANIiI»QUAN121/HHQUAN.IhTITY/ RECE 1
DATA QUALUI ,w JALC2 >/«4 HQUAL ,HHIT Y / RECE 5
N6-6 RE" 6
Nb-b RECE 7
INCMT=INCNT*1 R^CE &
READ IN5.1Q01 IANAME(I 1,1 = 1fm REcf 9
100 FORMAT CHA«» ,1m RE CE IQ
150 IF(ANAME(3).EC.QUAL
-------
* * * *
ULOCK DATA TITLE2
COMMON /CARD/ TI TLE < «4 , 1J I
UATA TITLE /«*HSULF ,t» HA TES ,HH ,«»H
A <«HTOTA,»»HL FC,*»H f«*H
B
C
D HHN1TR,*»HITE ,«*H t««H ,
E 1HNITR tUHAFE «<4H ,UH f
J 4HTSS «<«H ,<»H ,«*H ,
K *»HTEMP,MH£RATf»JHURE ,4H ,
L (4HLAST,«»H CON.IHSTIT.IHUENT/
END
-220-
-------
APPENDIX C
SSWMM - RECEIV II INPUT REQUIREMENTS
-221-
-------
SSWMM INPUT
FORMAT
12
20A4
12
12
12
12
F5.0
F5.0
12
12
12
4012
4012
4012
COLUMNS
1-2
1-80
1-2
3-4
5-6
7-8
9-13
14-18
19-20
21-22
23-24
1-2
3-4
5-6
79-80
1-2
3-4
5-6
19-20
1-2
3-4
5-6
VARIABLE
JOUT
TITLE
IDEAS
NSTEP
NHR
NMM
DELT
PCTZER
NSAVE
INLETS
NPFI
ISAVE (1)
ISAVE (2)
ISAVE (3)
ISAVE (40)
ISAVE (41)
ISAVE (42)
ISAVE (43)
ISAVE (50)
ISFI (1)
ISFI (2)
ISFI (3)
DESCRIPTION
OUTPUT FILE F0R LNKPRQ (0 IF NOT CREATING
AN OUTPUT FILE)
1 DESCRIPTIVE TITLE CARD
BASIN IDENTIFICATION
# OF TIME STEPS
HOUR OF START OF STORM
MINUTES OF START OF STORM
TIME STEP LENGTH (SEC)
% OF IMPERVIOUS AREA WITH ZERO DETENTION
(ARTIFICIAL-25%)
# OF ELEMENTS WHOSE FLOWS AND POLLUTANT MASS
LOADS ARE TO BE PRINTED (MAX=50) INLETS AND
ANY SUBCATCHMENTS
# OF INLETS (MAX=20) BOTTOM OF RUNOFF AREA
OR SYSTEM (EACH INLET MUST BE THE LAST
DOWNSTREAM ELEMENT)
# OF POLLUTANTS TO BE SAVED ON FILE (MAX=8)
ELEMENT NUMBERS WHOSE FLOWS AND POLLUTANT
MASS ARE TO BE PRINTED
CARD 4B USED ONLY IF NSAVE > 40
INLET NUMBERS IN BASIN
CARD
1
2
3
4A
4B
5
-------
SSWMM INPUT
FORMAT
15
15
15
COLUMNS
1-5
6-10
11-15
VARIABLE
NHISTO
NELT
NHYT
DESCRIPTION
# OF RAINFALL DATA POINTS (MAX=100)
TOTAL # OF ELEMENTS (MAX=99)
# OF HYETOGRAPHS (MAX=4)
REPEAT CARD GROUP 7 FOR EACH HYETOGRAPH
(MUST BE READ IN ORDER)
10F5.0
1-5
6-10
11-15
•
•
•
45-50
RAIN (1,1)
RAIN (1,2)
RAIN (1,3)
•
•
RAIN (1,10)
RAINFALL INTENSITY FOR HYETOGRAPH #1
(IN/HR). DURATION OF RAINFALL
INTENSITY MUST EQUAL THE TIME STEP
LENGTH (DELT). NUMBER OF CARDS
F0R EACH HYETOGRAPH=
(NHISTO+9)/10 (TRUNCATE
DECIMAL PLACES)
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE READ
ACCORDING TO INCREASING ELEMENT ORDER
REPEAT CARDS 8 AND 9 IF NCHAR (KT)=1
OR CARDS 8 AND 10 IF NCHAR (KT)=2
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
IELT
NCHAR (KT)
NUP(KT)
IUP(KT,1)
IUP(KT,2)
IUP(KT,3)
NRG(KT)
ELEMENT NUMBER
ELEMENT TYPE
(1 - WATERSHED)
(2 - PIPE OR MANHOLE)
# OF UPSTREAM ELEMENTS (MAX=3)
1ST UPSTREAM ELEMENT
2ND UPSTREAM ELEMENT
3RD UPSTREAM ELEMENT
HYETOGRAPH NUMBER, BASED ON ORDER READ IN
(VALUE NEEDED ONLY FOR WATERSHED. DEFAULT
VALUE IS 1)
CARD
6
7
8
-223-
-------
SSWMM INPUT
FORMAT
15X
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
20X
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
SOX
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
F8.0
COLUMNS
1-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
1-20
21-28
29-36
37-44
1-80
1-8
9-16
17-24
25-32
33-40
41-48
49-56
57-64
65-72
VARIABLE
BLANK
EWIDTH(KT)
AREA(KT)
PCIMP(KT)
SLOPE (KT)
BLANK
EWIDTH(KT)
GLEN(KT)
SLOPE (KT)
BLANK
G6
W5
W6
WSTORE (1)
WSTORE(2)
WLMAX
WLMIN
DECAY
FPSX
DESCRIPTION
WIDTH OF OVERLAND FLOW (FT)
AREA OF WATERSHED (AC)
% IMPERVIOUSNESS
WATERSHED SLOPE (FT/FT)
DIAMETER OF PIPE (FT)
LENGTH OF PIPE (FT)
INVERT SLOPE (FT/FT)
OR
BLANK CARD IF ELEMENT IS A MANHOLE
MANNING'S COEFFICIENT NEEDED FOR GUTTER
DEPTH CALCULATIONS OR PIPE FLOWS
IMPERVIOUS AREA RESISTANCE FACTOR
(MANNING'S COEFFICIENT)
PERVIOUS AREA RESISTANCE FACTOR
(MANNING'S COEFFICIENT)
RETENTION STORAGE FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA (IN)
RETENTION STORAGE FOR PERVIOUS AREA (IN)
MAXIMUM INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR)
MINIMUM INFILTRATION RATE (IN/HR)
DECAY RATE OF INFILTRATION (I/SEC)
EXPONENTIAL DECAY COEFFICIENT OF
POLLUTANTS OF WATERSHED
CARD
9
10
11
-224-
-------
SSWMM INPUT
FORMAT
5X
15
F10.0
15
15
F10.0
8F10.0
e.g.
8F10.0
COLUMNS
1-5
6-10
1-10
11-15
16-20
21-30
1-10
11-20
21-30
•
71-80
CBFACT(l)
CBFACT(2)
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71-80
VARIABLE
BLANK
MQUAL
DESCRIPTION
CONTROL CARD TO ALLOW FOR QUALITY MODELING
0 - NO QUALITY MODELED
1 - QUALITY MODELED
IF MQUAL = 0, SKIP GARBS 13-25
CBVOL
NQS
ISS
DRYDAY
CBFACT(l)
CBFACT(2)
CBFACT(3)
•
•
CBFACT(8)
AVERAGE CATCHBASIN (VOLUME (FT3))
NUMBER OF POLLUTANTS (MAX=8)
METHOD FOR CALCULATING SUSPENDED SOLIDS
(0 IF CALCULATION IS TO BE DONE THE SAME
WAY AS FOR OTHER POLLUTANTS)
NUMBER OF DRY DAYS PREVIOUS TO STORM.
i.e., RAINFALL PREVIOUS TO STORM
< 1.0 IN.
CONCENTRATION OF 8 POLLUTANTS IN
CATCHBASINS. (THESE CONCENTRATIONS
CAN BE ARBITRARILY CHOSEN AS CAN THE
POLLUTANTS EXCEPT FOR SUS. SOL.)
= CONCENTRATION OF BOD, OR COD, OR ...
= CONCENTRATION OF SUS. SOL.
DXFACT(l)
DXFACT(2)
DXFACT(3)
DXFACT(4)
DXFACT(5)
DXFACT(6)
DXFACT(7)
DXFACT(8)
DUST AND DIRT LOADING RATES
FOR ANY 8 ARBITRARILY CHOSEN
LAND USES (LBS/DRY DAY-FT2)
• •
CARD
12
13
14
15
-225-
-------
SSWMM INPUT
FORMAT
F10.0
F10.0
F10.3
5F10.0
COLUMNS
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
71-80
VARIABLE
XFACT(1,1)
XFACT(1,2)
XFACT(1,3)
XFACT(1,4)
XF ACT (1,8)
DESCRIPTION
CONCENTRATION OF 8 POSSIBLE .CONSTITUENTS
IN A GRAM OF DUST AND DIRT FOR FIRST
LAND USE (mg/g)
(MUST USE 8 CARDS LEAVING SOME BLANK IF
NECESSARY)
REPEAT CARD 16 FOR LAND USES #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, AND #8
8F10.0
8F10.0
1-10
11-20
21-30
*
71-80
1-10
11-20
21-30
*
*
71-80
Fl(2)
Fl(3)
Fl(8)
F2(l)
F2(2)
F2(3)
*
F2(8)
FACTOR FOR INSOLUBLE POLLUTANT WITHIN
SETTLEABLE SOLIDS TO BE ADDED TO
POLLUTANT ALREADY WASHED FROM SURFACE
DEFAULT ESTIMATES FROM SWMM ARE AS FOLLOWS:
BOD = .02
N = .01
P04 = .001
OTHERS = 0.
FACTOR FOR INSOLUBLE POLLUTANT WITHIN
SUSPENDED SOLIDS TO BE ADDED TO
POLLUTANT ALREADY WASHED FROM SURFACE
DEFAULT ESTIMATES FROM SWMM ARE AS FOLLOWS :
BOD = .05
N = .045
P04 = .0045
OTHERS = 0.
CARD
16
17-23
24
25
REPEAT CARDS 26, 27, 28 FOR EACH WATERSHED
(MUST BE READ IN ORDER OF COMPUTATION)
15X
F10.0
1-15
16-25
BLANK
BASINS (KT)
NUMBER OF CATCHBASINS WITHIN WATERSHED
26
-226-
-------
SSWMM INPUT
„•-— ^—»»
FORMAT
' •_— ______™™*H__»"ill^«Hl>
COLUMNS
I .,
VARIABLE
F10.0 26-35 REFF
// OF STREET SWEEPER
PASSES
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
F10.0
8F10.5
8F10.5
'
12
36-45
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
71-80
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
71-80
•WM«V«MV»— nBH^HHM
1-2
CLFREQ
XLAND(l)
XLAND(2)
XLAND(3)
XLAND(4)
XLAND(5)
XLAND(8)
GQLEN(l)
GQLEN(2)
GQLEN(3)
GQLEN(4)
GQLEN(5)
GQLEN(8)
_™ IBBBIM^^,™ .^•••^^ ^^ _^^B-gB-^BBM^M^—
IDWF
— — _
DESCRIPTION
" — — ______
REMOVAL EFFICIENCY (SEE TABLE BELOW)
CLEANING FREQUENCY Rgj
1 1
CARD
26
(Cont)
T
.98
0-8 >95
8-15 92
15 ;88
0-8 .75
8-15 . 70
15 .60
STREET CLEANING FREQUENCY
FRACTION (EXPRESSED AS A DECIMAL) OF
LAND US? WITHIN WATERSHED
•
AREA OF EACH LAND USE IN FT2
CONTROL CARD TO MODEL DRY WEATHER FLOW
0 - NO DRY WEATHER FLOW MODELED
27
28
•~~~>>l-— ~-W-«V-IllMM
29
IF IDWF = 0, SKIP THE REMAINING CARDS
-227-
-------
SSWMM INPUT
FORMAT
F10.5
F10.5
F10.5
F10.5
8F10.5
COLUMNS
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
1-10
11-20
•
•
*
71-80
VARIABLE
DWF
CBOD
CSS
CCOLI
DDWF(l.l)
DDWF(1,2)
•
•
•
DDWF(1,24)
DESCRIPTION
BASE DRY WEATHER FLOW
BOD CONCENTRATION FACTOR
SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION FACTOR
F. COLIFORMS CONCENTRATION FACTOR
FLOW DIURNAL VARIATION, BASED ON A
24 HOUR CYCLE
t
REPEAT CARD GROUPS 31-33 FOR VARIATION IN
BOD
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
F. COLIFORMS
CARD
30
31-33
34-36
37-39
40-42
-228-
-------
LNKPRG INTERPRETER INPUT
FORMAT
15
15
F5.0
F5.0
15
1015
1015
1015
COLUMNS
1-5
6-10
1-5
6-10
11-15
1-5
6-10
•
VARIABLE
IFL
IF0
RZERO
RDELT
ISDY
NPOLL(l)
NPOLL(2)
NPOLL( INLETS)
DESCRIPTION
SSWMM OUTPUT FILE
LNKPRG OUTPUT FILE
RECEIV START UP TIME (HRS)
RECEIV QUANTITY TIME-STEP LENGTH (SEC)
MUST BE A MULTIPLE OF SSWMM TIME STEP
CONTROL VARIABLE TO NOTE SSWMM
START-UP TIME BEGINS ON THE NEXT DAY
AFTER RECEIV START-UP TIME.
(0 IF SSWMM STARTS ON SAME DAY)
# OF POLLUTANTS TO BE PASSED AS INPUT
TO RECEIV FOR EACH INLET
CARD
1
2
3
REPEAT CARDS 4 & 5
FOR EACH SOURCE INLET
1-5
6-10
11-15
1-5
6-10
11-15
*
NPIN(I.K)
K=1,NPOLL(I)
1=1, INLETS
NPOT(I,K)
POSITION OF POLLUTANTS IN THE
SSWMM OUTPUT FILE THAT ARE TO
BE PASSED TO RECEIV
POSITION OF POLLUTANTS IN THE
RECEIV INPUT ARRAY
4
5
-229-
-------
LNKPRG INTERPRETER INPUT
FORMAT
2A3
2A3
2A3
2A3
15
F5.0
COLUMNS
1-6
7-12
*
.
61-66
1-5
6-10
VARIABLE
PTLE(l)
PTLE(2)
PTLE(ll)
NOPS
TFIN
DESCRIPTION
POLLUTANT COLUMN HEADINGS FOR
LNKPRG PRINTOUT
NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCES
FINAL RECEIV II TIME AT END OF MODELING
PERIOD - HRS
REPEAT CARDS 8 AND 9
FOR EACH ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCES
15
F5.2
F8.0
10F80
1-5
6-10
11-18
1-8
9-16
.
72-80
NAPS
FL0
APSP(l)
APSP(2)
APSP(3)
t
APSP(ll)
ID NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCES
ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCE FLOW (CU M/SEC)
(WITHDRAWAL IS NEGATIVE; DISCHARGE IS POSI-
TIVE)
ADDITIONAL :POINT SOURCE MASS LOADINGS (mg/SEC'
IN RECEIV INPUT ARRAY SEQUENCE
ADDITIONAL POINT SOURCE MASS LOADINGS
(mg/SEC) IN RECEIVE INPUT ARRAY SEQUENCE
CARD
6
7
8
9
-230-
-------
SETUP DATA DECK
1
Ni
U)
h-1
Card
Group
A
B
C
D
Number of Cards
1
2
1
One card for
each node which
has one or more
sources
associated with
it
Card
Column
1-2
1-80
1-5
6-15
16-20
1-5
6-55
Description
Check for calling of SUBROUTINE SETUP
= 1, do not call SETUP
= 0, CALL SETUP
If RUN = 1 on Card Group A, skip remaining groups
River basin title cards
Number of nodes with source inputs (Total=storm+Add-
itional)
Time of first source inputs with respect to model
start time
Number of times at which one or more sources change
input values (# RAINFALL STEPS +2)
Node number
Number of each source associated with node (maximum of
10)
Variable
Name
RUN
TITLE
MJSW
TZERO
NSTEPS
ISW
NS
Format
2
+
20A4
15
F10.0
15
15
1015
Default
Value
0
none
none
none
none
none
0
Units
hours
-------
QUANTITY DATA DECK
1
N3
UJ
1
Card
Group
1
2
3
4
5
Number of Cards
1
2
2
1
Card
Column
1-8
1-60
1-60
1-5
6-10
11-15
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
41-45
46-50
51-55
56-60
61-65
66-70
Description
If hydraulic calculations are to carried out, enter
"QUANTITY." If not, leave blank and omit remaining
cards .
Title for run
Title for Basin
Number of tidally forced junctions
Number of dams
= 0, print input channel and junction data
= 1, skip printing
Number of day cycles desired
Number of hours/day cycle (>1 and <30)
Length of quality timestep }
. - , . -, . ^ .. 1 (QINT/DELT) < 12
Length of hydraulic timestep 1 ~
Initial time for start of hydrograph input from cards
Number of nodes for time-history printout (2,<100)
Variable
Name
ANAME (1)
ANAME (2)
ALPHA
TITLE
NTIDE
NDAM
ISWCH (2)
NTCYC
PERIOD
QINT
DELT
TZERO
NHPRT
NQPRT
EVAP
WIND
WDIR
NQSWRT
NJSW
INRAIN
Format
2A4
15A4
15A4
15
15
15
15
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
15
15
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
15
15
15
Default
Value
blank
blank
blank
0
0
0
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
0
0
none
none
none
none
Units
hours
hours
seconds
hour
mm/hr
m/sec
degrees
from
North
-------
1
N5
U>
u>
1
QUANTITY DATA DECK
Card
Group
6
7
8
9
Number of Cards
maximum=25
maximum=7
maximutn=7
Not implemented
see text
Card
Column
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
1-10
11-20
*
1-7
8-10
11-17
18-20
Description
If INRAIN = 0, SKIP CARD GROUP 6 (maximum number of
points = 100, four per card)
Rate of precipitation
Time from model start time
Etc., up to INRAIN points
•
•
Node(s) selected for stage-history printout; NHPRT
values 8 per card
First node number
Second node number
*
*
Last node number
Channels selected for flow print, NQPRT values,
8 per card
Lower node number at end of first desired channel
Higher node number at end of desired channel
Lower node number at end of second desired channel
Higher node number at end of second desired channel
* •
• •
• •
Lower node number at end of last desired channel
Higher node number at end of last desired channel
Variable
Name
RAIN(l)
INTIMEd
•
•
JPRT(l)
JPRT(2)
*
JPRT
(NHPRT)
>CPRT(1)
\CPRT(2)
•
•
)cPRT
j (NQPRT)
Format
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
110
110
•
'•
110
110
110
•
•
•
110
Default
Value
none
none
none
none
none
none
*
none
none
none
*
Units
mm/hr
min
-------
QUANTITY DATA DECK
Card
Group
10
(Type A)
10
(Type B)
11
Number of Cards
One card for
tidally forced
junction, each
Group 10A card
is followed by
the Group 10B
cards for the
same tidally
forced junction
At least two
cards for each
tidally-forced
node; these
cards follow
the correspond-
ing tidally-
forced note,
if K0=0.
If K0=l and
NI=4,1 card.
One card for
each dam, i.e. ,
number of cards
in Group 11
= NDAM
Card
Column
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
:
'
1-5
6-10
Description
If NTIDE=0 on Card Group 4, skip Card Group 10
Node number of tidally-forced node
If=l, will expand from tide points (HHW,LHW,LLW,
HLW) for tidal coefficients
Number of tidal stage data points for junction
Maximum number of iterations for curve fit, usually 50
=0, skip tidal input print
=1 print all tidal parameters
IF NTIDE=0 on Card Group 10B
NI pairs of values, 4 pairs/card, minimum of 7 pairs
Time of tidal stage, first point
Tidal stage, first point
Time of tidal stage, second point
Tidal stage, second point
*
*
Time of tidal stage, last point
Tidal stage, last point
IF NDAM=0 on Card Group 4, skip Card Group 11
Node number of node immediately upstream of dam
Node number of node immediately downstream of dam
Variable
Name
JTIDE
KO
NI
MAXIT
NCHTID
TT(1)
YY(1)
TT(2)
YY(2)
.
TT(NI)
YY(NI)
JDAM(,1)
JDAM(,2)
Format
15
15
15
15
15
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
•
F10.0
F10.0
15
15
Default
Value
none
none
none
none
*
*
none
none
none
none
j
Units
i
hours
meters
hours
meters
»
hours
meters
r
-------
QUANTITY DATA DECK
Card
Group
11
(cont.)
1
10
LO
1
12
umber of Cards
ne for each
node
'maximum =10)
Card
Column
11-20
21-30
31-40
1-5
•
6-10
11-20
21-25
26-30
31-40
41-50
51-70
71-75
76-80
Description
Weir Factor=XW, where:
W = width of spillway for broad or narrow
crested weir
= 1 for V-notched weir
X = 1.8299 for narrow crested
X = 1.67 for broad crested
X = 1.416 tan , where (J> = angle of notch
Elevation of rest of weir, referenced to datum plane
Exponent for Weir equation
=1.5 for broad and narrow crested
=2.5 for V-notched
Node number
Water surface elevation referenced to datum plane
Surface area of node*
Node constant flow into receiving waters
Node constant flow out of receiving waters
Depth of node bottom**
Nodal Manning's coefficient (Include Manning's
coefficient if program develops geometric data)
(blank)
X - coordinate
Y - coordinate
Variable
Name
DAM(,1)
DAM(,2)
DAM(,3)
J
H(J)
AS(J)
QIN(J)
QOU(J)
DEP(J)
X(J)
Y(J)
Format
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
15
F5.0
F10.0
F5.0
F5.0
F10.0
F5.0
F5.0
Default
Value
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
Units
meters
,
meters
meters
sq.
meters
m^/sec
m3/sec
meters
kilo-
meters
kilo-
meters
* Half of the surface area of the previous channel plus half of the
surface area of succeeding channel
** Directed positive downward from datum plane
-------
QUANTITY DATA DECK
1
to
OJ
ON
1
Card
Group
13
14
15
16
17
18
Number of Cards
1
One for each
channel
(maximum = 10)
1
Not implemented
see text
Card
Column
1-5
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-35
36-45
46-55
56-65
66-75
1-5
Description
To terminate node cards, write 99999
User assigned channel number
Node at upper end of channel
Node at lower end of channel
Blank, unless TRIAN is used to develop geometric
data. Node which, with first two junctions, form an
acute triangle.
Program will develop channels and node
characteristics
Blank unless it is a number of a fourth node which
lies between a pair of previous three junctions.
Program will develop geometric data.
Length of channel
Width of Channel
Average depth of channel (channel**)
Manning's coefficient, n
Initial velocity
To terminate channel cards, write 99999
Variable
Name
N
NTEMP(l)
NTEMP(2)
NTEMP(4)
ALEN
WIDTH
RAD
COEF
VEL
Format
15
15
15
15
15
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
15
Default
Value
none
none
none
.018
none
Units
meters
meters
meters
p./sec
** Directed positive downward from datum plane.
-------
QUANTITY DATA DECK
Card
Group
19
20
21
22
Number of Cards
1 or 2
Repeat for each
time- step
1
1
Card
Column
1-5
6-10
1-10
11-20
21-30
1-10
1-8
Description
If NJSW = 0 on Card Group 5, skip to Card Group 22
Nodes for storm water input, NJSW values (maximum=20)
First nodes number for storm water input
Second nodes number for storm water input
Last nodes number for storm water input
Time for hydrograph
Flow for first node
Flow for second node
Flow for last node
Terminate input hydrograph cards with TE(1) beyond
expected time of analysis
Enter "ENDQUANT" in field
(End of QUANTITY Data Deck)
Variable
Name
JSW(l)
JSW(2)
JSW(NJSW)
TE(1)
QEU.l)
QE(1,2)
QE
(1,NJSW)
Format
15
15
15
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
2A4
Default
Value
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
Units
seconds
m3/sec
m3/sec
m3/sec
sec
I
N>
U>
•~J
I
-------
LO
QO
I
Card
Group
1
2
3
4
Type A
QUALITY DATA DECK
Number of Cards
1
1
'
1 Card per
constituent
being modeled
Card
Column
9-15
6-10
21-25
46-50
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
1-16
17-20
Description
Enter "QUALITY".
Skip printing of maximum and minimum
concentrations (=1)
Tidally influenced receiving water (=1)
Use only first daily cycle on input
file (=1)
Number of junctions with sources
specified on card (max = 50)
Daily cycle at which detailed quality
information will begin printing.
Number of cycles between printing of
quality results
Total number of daily cycles printed
(maximum 50 cycles)
Number of Daily Cycles Desired
Print interval-days NPRT = 1 to
Print Every Day
Name of Constituent:
SULFATES
TOTAL FE
MANGANESE
ALUMINUM
TDS
TSS
TEMPERATURE
or terminator
LAST CONSTITUENT
(Blank)
Variable
Name
ANAME (3)
ANAME (4)
ISWCH (2)
ISWCH (5)
ISWCH(IO)
NJSW
ITCPRT
NQPRT
LQCPRT
NTC
NPRT
CONST
Format
2A4
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
4A4
Default
Value
blank
0
1
0
0
none
none
none
none
none
none
Units
!
i
|
hours
i
-
-
days
-
-------
VD
I
r '
Card
Group I
4
Type A
(cont.)
I
i
i
t
4
Type B
I
lumber of Cards
]
1 Card per
node per
constituent
set
i
Card
Column
21-25
t
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
56-60
61-65
66-70
71-75
76-80
1-16
17-20
21-25
QUALITY DATA DECK
Description
Temperature Compensation
coefficient (Theta)
except for chlorophyll a: Time of
sunrise (SUNRIS)
Following data entries for Chlorophyll a
only
Time of sunset (SUNSET)
Average daily maximum light intensity
(AVGLIT)
Saturation light intensity (SATLIT)
Extinction coefficient (EXCOEF)
Growth coefficient (GTCOEF)
Rate of respiration (RRESP)
Michaelis constant for nitrogen
Michaelis constant for phosphorous
Nitrogen ratio (AZINCH)
Phosphorous ratio (PINCH)
Oxygen ratio (02INCH)
Name of constituent
Node number
Initial concentration
Variable
Name
VAR(l)
VAR(2)
VAR(3)
VAR(4)
VAR(5)
VAR(6)
VAR(7)
VAR(S)
VAR(9)
VAR(IO)
VAR(ll)
VAR(12)
CONST
VAR(l)
Format
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
4A4
14
F5.0
Default
Value
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
none
0
0
Units
l/'C
hours
joule
m2-day
joule
1/m
mg/1
mg/1
mg
mg
mg
mg
SS.
-
jng/1
1
°C
-------
QUALITY DATA DECK
Card
Group
4
Type B
(cont.)
5
6
Number of Cards
1 Card for
each Channel
when modeling
oxygen
1 or 2,
depending on
number of nodes
Card
Column
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
1-4
5-10
11-15
16-25
26-35
36-45
1-5
6-10
*
Description
Background source concentration
Reaction rate or Benthic demand (DO)
or Grazing rate (chlorophyll a) .
Concentration of ocean sink (tidally
forced node only)
Ocean exchange coefficient (XRQD)
REAE-
RATION
Channel Number
K coef. for reaeration computation
K coef. for reaeration computation
K coef. for reaeration computation
Node number for 1st additional
source node
Node number for 2nd additional
source node
Node number for NJSW additional
source node
Variable
Name
VAR(2)
VAR(3)
VAR(4)
VAR(5)
ID
ICHAN
A
B
C
JSW(l)
JSW(2)
JSW
(NJSW)
Format
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
F5.0
A4
6X
15
F10.0
F10.0
F10.0
15
15
15
Default
Value
0
0
0
0
none
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
0
Units
mg/1
106MPN
1
°C
I/ day
joule
mz-day
i
- i
-------
QUALITY DATA DECK
Card
Group
7
Number of Cards
1 set per time
specified; set
consists of
1-2 card(s) per
constituent
modeled
Card
Column
1-16
17-26
27-31
32-37
•
•
Description
Constituent name
Time
Mass rate for 1st node
Mass rate for 2nd node
•
•
Mass rate for NJSW node
Variable
Name
CONST ( )
TE( )
CD( )
CE( )
*
•
CE( )
Format
4A4
F10.0
F6.0
F6.0
•
*
F6.0
Default
Value
Blank
0
0
0
•
•
0
Units
s
gm/s
gm/s
•
*
gm/s
-------
APPENDIX D
SSWMM - RECEIV II INPUT LISTINGS
FOR MODEL RUNS'1,2,3, AND 4
-242-
-------
MODEL RUN 1 - INITIAL RUN - STORM SEPT. 17, 1976
WARREN GENERATING STATION, WARREN, PA.
* * * *
// JOB SSWMK
// DVC RES
// LBL iLOKOlTRCLIB
// LFD THCLIB
// DVC 20
// LFD PRNTR
// DVC 20 // LFD FORID3
// DVC 51 // VOL TMCUC1
// LBL 'WARREN STO»M 2 SSWHM INITIAL' // LFD FORT21
// EXEC SWIM.TftCLIB
21
DATA SET STORM 2, SEPTEMBER 17, 1976 WArtREK GENERATING STATION
1400745 900. 25. 337
358
3 S fc
40
n.o
.05
.03
.C3
1
2
3
„
5
6
7
8
• U
D
b
.04
.05
.03
0.0
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
15
I
o.u
.003
1
.04
.05
.03
a.a
a
i
i
0
i
j
i
i
C'.Ol
7
. 04
.11
..'13
0.0
333.
1
2
488.0
*
275 .0
6
7
2
0
0.0
C.003
9 <* 3 . b
VJ3.5
993.5
.04 .04
.11 .07
.05 .03
3.1 0.0
2.61 100.
1 .0 1
1.71 100.
2.53 100.
2!">.
U.U6
21. 74
0.0
0.003
1.0
1.0
1.0
.04
.07
.03
:).a
i
.018
53.13
1
.137
1
.045
325.
2
.05 .05 .05
.07 .07 .03
.03 .03 .03
0.0 0.0 0.0
.137
.022
0.0
D.D 0.0
18.7 .3
18.7 «3
18.7 .3
0.0 0.0
0.0
3.4 b.5
3.«* b.5
3.«» 6.5
o.c o.o o.o o.o .0
j.c c>.c 0.3 o.a »c
,).i o.o luo.a
11 $ i> I 3. -243-
-------
•'J . 0
u.u
130.J
1.
i). J 0 . (J
1 .
nous.
L
/*
/L
// FIK
-244-
-------
» *
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
* <
FIfv
JOb
DVC
DVC
DVC
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
LNKPRG
RES // LBL iLOKOlfRCLIB
20 // LFD PWNTF!
20 // LFD FJWT03
51 // VOL TWCUG1
STORM 2 SSWHM INITIAL*
VOL IHCHCI
STORM 2 LNKPRG INITIAL*
// LFU TfiCLIB
•WARREN
51 //
•WARREN
EXEC LNKPRG, TWCLI3
// LFD FORT21
// LFU FOR122
21 22
0.0 30. 1
666
234
11 1 2
234
11 1 2
234
11 1 2
SO1* TOT FE MN
5 72
463.661110232.
13J45. 206U.
5 -3.6 58211.
684. 108.
6 3.6 58211.
684. IQfi.
7-17.9 289443.
?400. 537.
8 17.9 2«9<4**3.
3-400. 337.
3
5
7
_*
5
3
6
7
6
7
6
7
7
10
7
in
7
10
AL
TDS
TSS
66660.
3600.
3600.
17900.
17903.
7222882. 797126.
378712. «»1795.
378712. 41795.
1883041. 207815.
1883041. 207815.
FIN
-245-
-------
* X
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
II * *
JOE
OrfC
DVC
DVC
DVC
L3L
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
nvc
LBL
EXEC
UUAN
RES /
if) / /
20 //
51 //
•WARREN
51 //
•WARREN
51 //
SLSCRAT
51 //
'UARREN
51 //
SLSChAT
51 //
SLSCRAT
51 //
SLSCRAT
/ LbL iLOKOl
LFD P^N TK
LFD FJRfCJ
VOL T«iCOGl
STORM 2 LNK
VOL TWCDCl
STORM 2 SET
VOL TRCJC1
2 // LFD F
VOL TtfCQOl
STORM 2 QUA
VOL TWCUD1
1 // LFD F
VOL TRCUC1
TRCLIB //
PRG INITIAL'
UPf // LFD
ORT21
N» // LFO
URT26
7 // LFD FORT27
VOL TrtCUGl
<> // LFD F
ORT2d
QUAN.TRCLIB
LFO TkCLIb
// LFU FORT21
FORT23
FORT25
li
DATA SLT STORM 2, SEP1EMHEK 17, 1976 WARREhi GENERATING STATION
STORM CONTAINS 1J RAINFALL STEPS
1 O.J 12
1 1
1125
5 3 h 7
9 8
OUANTI TVQUALIT i
DATA SET STORM 2, SEPTFMBER 17,1976 WARDEN GENERATING STATION
ALL LOADINGS TREATED AS FINITE SOURCES
'liASIN CONTAINS 3 SUBCA TCHM EN TS ,2 PIPES,AND 3 INLETS
TOTAL AREA - fa.PS AC^ES
0 1 J
3 21. .1 30. o.a 10 a o.o o.o o.o i o o
1231567
9 10
i 2 ? 3 31 45 56 67 78
9 1L 265.01 0.0 1.5
1 5.13 134072. -1.89 .033
2 2.69 111616. -1.59 .033
3 2.6«? 29350. -1.51 .033
1 2.69 23181. -1.17 .033
5 2.69 39073. -1.17 .033
6 2.69 68611. -1.17 .033
1 2.69 7591B. -1.17 .L33
8 2.69 3G2C3. -.80 .U33
9 1.17 17265. .033
10 U.25 <4?26:>. +.79 .033
9'. 9 9 9
1 1 2 1331. 133. -1.71 .033 .33
? * 37D. 106. -1.56 .033 .33
-* 3 1 Ibl. 121. -1.36 .033 .33
4 ** i 161. 167. -1.17 .033 .33
^ 'j 307. 167. -1.17 .033 .33
-246-
-------
b 6 7 460. IB?. -1.17 .033 .33
778 383. 172. -.98 .033 .33
8 B 9 (.90. 137. -.HO .033 .33
99999
ENDQUANT
/*
II
II FIN
-247-
-------
//
//
* * -»
JOb UTLNPS
DVC HES // LBL iLOKJlTfiCLIB
nVC 20 // LFD PrfNTR
// LFO TKCLIB
DVC
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
ovc
LBL
EXEC
0
23 // LFD FJWTC3
51 // VOL TRC001
•rfARREN STORM 2 SETUP'
[>1 // VOL T4CU01
•WARRCN STORK 2 GUAN*
51 // VOL TrtCOOl
SLSCRAT«4 // LfD FORT26
51 // VOL TrfCOOl
SLSCRAT7 // LFD FORT27
51 // VOL TKC001
SLSCPAT8 // LFD FORT28
UTLNPS,
// LFD FORT23
// LFO FORT25
QUALITY
U
20
1
SULFATES
SULFA1ES
SULFATtS
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATLS
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATES
TOTAL FE
TOTAL
TCTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TCTAL
TOTAL
MANGAKiLSE
MANGANESE
FE
FE
FE
KE.
Ft
FE
Ft
FE
TL
FE
14NC
'UNGANitSE
ALU^1 I MUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
0
se. 3 i
1.0 O.Q 0.0 O.C O.Q
112.DO
212.CO
312.00
512.
612.
712.
812.
91
2.
1U12.
1
"3
i
3
n
f
6
7
8
9
1C
1
2
3
U
c,
(»•
fc
7
6
9
lu
1
2
1
G.
0.
0.
3.
G.
a.
u.
u.
0.
0.
I
0.
u.
Li.
U.
u.
G.
a.
a.
Li.
a.
i .
i .
00
00
00
00
00
11
.a
15
15
15
1 5
15
15
15
15
15
15
.0
03
03
03
03
C3
03
03
03
03
03
01
DO
0
c.o
0.0 O.Q 0.0 0.0 0.0
o.o a.j O.Q a.u o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 U.O U.O 0.0 O.Q 0.0 0.0 0,
0.0 '.),0 0.0 0.0 O.P 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
-248-
-------
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
TDS
TDS
IDS
TbS
TDS
TDS
TCS
TDS
IDS
TDS
TtS
TSS
TSS
TSS
ISS
TSS
ISS
ISS
ISS
ISS
TSS
TSS
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURC
TEMPERATURE
TEMPERATURE
LAST CONSTITUENT
/t
1 V
/c
// FIKi
3 1 .00
i* 1..DO
s i.on
t i.on
7 l.DU
8 l.Uil
9 i.oa
10 l.CO
i.n
i loo. a
2iao.n
310IJ.O
MlUO.J
51GU.O
biau.o
Tiau.a
Bioa. a
9iua.-}
loioo.a
i. a
1 7.00
2 7.00
3 7.00
t 7. 0(1
b 7.00
6 7 . C 3
7 7.03
e 7.00
9 7. OH
10 7.0-3
1 2i, .
2 2C.
3 20.
4 20.
S 20.
b 2t.
7 20.
fc 20.
9 20.
1C 20.
O.L a.;j o.o o.a o.n o.o o.u o.o o.o o.o o.o
.0 o.a O.D o.u o.o u.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.a
-249-
-------
MODEL RUN 2 - CALIBRATION RUN - STORM SEPT. 17, 1976
WARREN GENERATING STATION, WARREN, PA.
* * * *
// JOB SSWMM
// DVC kES
// LBL S>LOK01TRCLIH
// LFD TWLLIB
// DVC 20
// LFD PRNTR
// DVC 20 // LFD F)RTC:'.
// OVC 51 // VOL T^CDCJl
// LUL 'WARREN STORM 2 SSWMM CALIBRATION 2« // L>'D FORT21
// EXEC SWiM,TRCLIK
/i
21
WA9RCN GENERATING STATION, WARRLNI, PA., STUhM 2 - SEPTEMBER IT, 1976
14CU74b 9LiD. 25. 337
3 5 d
358
40 8 1
•!UQ .^ .0<« .04 .D'» .Q<< .P'4
•Ob .05
. C 3 .03
.03 0.0
1 1
2 2
3 2
4 1
5 J
6 1
/ 2
8 2
.Cli
1
U.O
Q . (j
U.UD3
U . ,,
U.P
1 .
1 i 6 1; -> 5 t
.Oh .
.1)3 .
0.0 C
0
33
1
1
n
43K
I
0
275
1
1
0.013
T
0
G.O
V93
993
0
"j
11
03
.0
B.
1
2
.0
4
.0
6
7
r>
LJ
.0
03
.5
.5
— t
• C>
.I-
.11 .07 .07 .07 .07
.03 .03 .03 .03 .03
U.O G.O U.O 0.0 0.0
1
2.M ion. .018
l.C J5.J.13 .13?
1
l.M iOU. .137
1
2.53 ICO. ,U41i
2b. 32 5. .022
O.DU1 u
21.74
( ! . 0 C . D
0 .003
i.n iH.7
1 .0 18 .7
1.0 .ib.7
Li . 3 0.0
U.O 0.0
u.-l U.U 1UU.O
-250-
.03
.03
0.0
.0
o.n
.3
.3
.3
0.0
o.u
0.0
0.0
4.6
O.D
3.4
3.4
6.5
'fa. 5
6.5
.0
.Q
-------
0
/*
/(,
// FIN
n.u
o.o
1.
!'..') u.U
1.
1U U. U
lou.a
-251-
-------
» 4 V *
// JOB LNKMRI,
// DVC RUS // LOL i.L.)K )1 fRCLlB // LFD T*CLIB
// DVC 2'J // LTD PiONfR
// DVC 20 /./ LTD Fort !G3
// DVC bl // VOL T^CJOl
// LBL «WA:?WrN STOtiM 2 SSWHM CALiBWAFlON 2» // LFD FORT21
// DVC 51 // VOL TWC001
// LBL 'WAPPEN S10KM 2 LWKPPL* // LFP FOKT?2
// EXEC LNKPWG,1WCLIB
/S
2J 22
D.O 30. 1
666
? 3 t 5 6 7
111^3710
i1 J '+ S h 7
I I . 1 ..' 3 7 A 0
234567
1 1 1 ..' 3 7 10
SOU TOT FEHN 4L TDSTSS
5 72
•468. 66 lilt) 232.
13'J«*15. 2Q6U. fa'tObH. 7222882,, 797126.
5 -3.6 58211.
6bMc 10^. 3bOO. 378712e <«1795.
6 3.6 58211,
681. 1C?;1. 3600. 376712. 41795.
7-17.9 2894U3.
3MDU. !>37. 17900. 1883011. 20781fj.
8 17.V 2894UJ.
3"*UO. 537. 1790U. . 1883a«
-------
* * *
// JOB
// DVC
// ovc
// DVC
// DVC
// LBL
// DVC
// LBL
// DVC
// LUL
// DVC
// LUL
// DVC
// LBL
// DVC
// LBL
// DVC
// LBL
// EXE
t-
QUAN
RES /
2il //
20 //
51 //
•WARREN
51 //
•WARREN
51 //
SLSCRAT
51 //
•WARREN
51 //
SLSCRAT
51 //
SLSCRAT
51 //
SLSCRAT
C UUAN.T
/ LBL iLOKOI TRCLIB // LFD TRCLIU
LFD PWNTK
LFD FORTU3
VOL TRCJ01
STORM 2 L"4KPRG» // LFD FORT21
VOL TwCOOl
STORM 2 SFTUP' // LfO FOHT23
VOL IRCODl
2 // LfD FORr2««
VOL TRCUCl
STORh 2 OUAN* // LFD FORT25
VOL TRCUCI1
4 // LFD FORT2*
VOL T^CUOl
7 // LFD FOR f27
VOL TrfCUOl
8 // LFD FORT28
RCLIB
0
DATA SET STORM
STORM CONTAINS
•4 n.a
1 <4
•4 1 2
j 3 fa
9 8
CUftNTITYUUALITY
DATA SET STORM
ALL LOADINGS T«
RASIKi CONTAINS
TOTAL AKEA : 6.
2, SEPTEMBER 17, 1976
40 RAINFALL STEPS
I 42
5
7
fc GENERATING STATION
3
17,1976 WARREN GENERATING STATION
I TED AS FINITE SOURCFS
SURCATCHKENTS,2 PIPES,AND 3 INLETS
> ACRES
3
1
».
1
9
2
0
, 1
U.O
10
3
9
1
2
3
M
5
h
7
v
i
(j
10
!j. 13
2.69
2.69
2. 6 9
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
l.<47
U.2t>
10
3
0.0
L..U
0.0
5
U.O
0
7
29550.
2 3 1 8 1 .
59078.
H0203.
M7265.
47265.
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
5
.5
-------
& 6 7 <4c,n. 187. -1.17 .033
7 7 d 3115. 172, -.98 .033
6 6 s> 6VO. 1 J7. -,«U)
99999
EMOOUAiU
/*
/t
// FIN
-254-
-------
II
//
//
JOfa
DVC
DVC
DVC
DVC
L13L
DVC
LBL
DVC
LliL
DVC
LBL
DVC
LBL
' EXE
0
// I.FU
LFD FORT23
UTLNPS
KtS // LBL 'iLIKOl TRCL1R
2 a // LFD PrtNTR
20 // LFC FJRTljS
51 // VOL TrtCtlOl
•WARREN STOUM 2 SCTIIP' //
51 // VJL Tt-'CUO!
•WARREN STORM 2 QUAN» // LFD FOKT25
51 // VOL TrtCUOl
SLSCRATH // LFD FORT26
51 // VOL TRCiJOl
SLSCRAT7 // LFD FORT27
si // VOL T«caoi
SLSCRAT8 // LFD FORr2«
C UTLNPS,TRCL13
QUALITY
0
1 20
SULf
SULFATtS
SULFATtS
SULFATLS
SULFATtS
SULFATLS
SULFATtS
SULFATES
SULFATLS
SULFATtS
SILFATtS
TOT4L FE
TOTAL
IOIAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
1C! A L
TOTAL
JOTH
TOTftL
FL
FE
FL
FE
FE
ft
FE
^ E
ft
FE
36
5
1.1
112.0 J
212.00
312.01!
«»12.00
512.0(1
612.UCI
712.0U
812.on
912.mi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
1
2
3
\i
'i
*"*
s
5
!i
:i
';,
!»
0
<
jt
3
.03
•
.
.
.
•
.
1
»
*
u
D
0
u
C
0
f
C
0
5
}
J
i
J
J
n
il
]
i
Q.O
o.o u.a o.o J.Q o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o
O.D U.U Q.O 0.0 0.0 U.LJ 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
o.o n.o o.o u.o o.o u.o o.o o.a o.o o.o o.o
u.o J.o a
O.il U.O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
-255-
-------
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUM[NJh
TbS
TUS
ros
TDS
TDS
TDS
TDS
TUS
TOS
TUS
TDS
TSS
TSS
TSS
TSS
TSS
TSS
rss
TSS
rss
FSS
TSS
Tt '1PLK •UUC?£
TF MPERATURE
UMPERATURC
TLMPL'R A TURF.
TEMPLR ATUPF.
LMPFPATUK't
L6ST
X*
XL
XX f
3 1 .C<)
*» I.U.I
5 l.C:>
t l.DM
7 1 ,U!J
b i -ua
9 l.U'l
1C l.UU
1 .1)
nuu.o
2100.!)
3100.iJ
510.J.1)
610LJ. )
71U ".'I
61UJ.J
9 I Oil. l.)
1 01 U U . !1
l.i
1 7.U)
2 7,'JD
3 7.0'J
«» 7 . G 1
5 7. CD
6 7.0'J
7 7.01
6 7. OH
9 7.0'J
10 7.0 >
1
2
3
6
7
e
9
10
JO.
/c.
-•Hi.
20.
JO.
.-'0.
2H.
20.
D.D j.n o.o o.o o.n i.n o.o u.n Q.Q o.n o.o
0.0 J.J 0.U
L'.n
j.'j o.o a. a o.o o.a o.u
-256-
-------
MODEL RUN 3 - VERIFICATION RUN - STORM AUGUST 26, 1976
WARREN GENERATING STATION, WARREN, PA
* * * -t
// JOB bSWMH
// TVC kZS
// LBL iLOKu I T i?C'.I 3
// LFD T^CLl'i
// DVC 2J
U LKu P^NTR
// nvc 20 // LFP F.)Rrc«
// DtfC bl // VOL T^CJUl
// LBL '-jARRtN SCOKM 1 SSW-1M CALIBRATION »5« // LFQ F04T2.1
// EXEC S* iM,T KLI 3
/i
21
JAPM..N oi; NCR AT [NT STAT tO -I, tl!)?h
1 ?r. lu iL 3 Qu . 2^.337
3 S 8
3 5 :.i
2'-J h 1 ' ' '
. rJ . 16 . 1 o .16 .1 f> 1. U . :). C . -J.
9. ). D. J.C U. 1 .11.0 :).J U.L J.'J J.O
I 1 i] 1
• 33d . i .61 iOU. . )1-VJ
2211
1 .u 155.13 .1 «?
i 2 1 2
4 1 .1 1
4 3 fi . L I . M i J J. .137
52 I •*
t> 1 J I •
2rcj .D 2.s ". LOU. .•)'*:.
7 7 it
?i. 525. .J22
8 2 1 7
.Lib 0.013 U.D)1 O.U 0.0 0.0 <4 ,f>
1
,1 , :J ? L
1 I . 'i 1
(.'.;.) !J.."J
l . n 13,7
1 . il i ti . 7
1.0 18 . /
U.I?
.3
.3
.3
n.u
3.»*
3.M
3. a
6.5
6.5
6.5
(li n.-j o.o c.c o.o .u
*P :-,..-'- 0,0 Q«P L'.fj .U
1% tff ~* ™ '
i •
.1.1 J . u i u J . '.I
i. -257-
-------
;j.i a. a loo.a
i.
110055.
P
/*
/I
II F IN
// JOB L^KPRG
// DVC M£S // LBL iLOKJl TRCLIB // LFJ T&CLI9
// DVC 2J // LFO MNTR
// PVC 20 // LFD F3RTC3
// DVC 51 // VOL T.JCOQ1
// LBL 'WARREN STORM 1 SSWMM CALIBRATION «5' // LFD FORT21
// DVC 51 II VOL T3CUU1
// L8L 'WARREN STO&M 1 LNKPRG CALIBRATION 5* // LFO FORT22
// EXEC LNKPRG,T?CL1 )
? 1
3.0
f)
I
1 1
2
1 1
2
\ \
**! ') 14
M6
11 79
'5
J2
u
12
7-
M .' 1
8
Ml
/-.
n.
// r ;N
?2
30. 1
6 6
? i| r
1 2 3
3 -f 5
1 2 3
345
1 2 3
ror FE /IN
•i.oo 856377.
.?. 20S 1.
-3.6 4^?23.
a . : o h .
3*6 '44921.
:> . 1 G J .
17.9 2233V?.
7. 5?7.
i7.9 223 Jv;?.
7 . b ? 7 .
' 7
' 10
»> 7
7 ID
'j 7
7 1C
AL TOS TSS
784,1570. 530742.
M2!00. 27S28.
112^00* 27828.
179DU. 20««9550. 138367.
1790U. 20»«y55a. 138367.
-258-
-------
* * >
' JUt C.JAN
{ nvc K.:S // .NL ,>La* n r~ :L i-i // t_f j ih:m>
/ "' ^C 2 •] // ;. ,-'j >•'•?•, TK
/ L-VL 2 ) // L -J F )K Jl J
/ Di/C :>l // v:)L T-tCULl
/ LiiL *l // V3L T JCJL1
/ L1L •WARRCN S fO }f> 1 ST.TJP CULlEUAflON 5" // LFD I
'/ PtfC bl // VOL HC'JCl
'/ L 5L SLSCRAT2 // LFD FOPT24
If CtfC bl // V )L T JC.JCl
f/ LUL *JA^«CN STO^M 1 QUA'4 CALl'iW AT 1.0 "J j« // LFO H(
^/ OVC bl // VOL TJCilUl
^/ LBL bLSCRAT4 // L!: 0 F0^r?3
// CVC 51 // VOL T ?C,)L i
// LbL SUS::»AT7 // Lfu F ")R T2 1
II fVC il // V)L T *C Jo I
// L3L SLSCRAT3 // LFO f 1^ T 2 J
// EKtC 3LUN,T'
n StT S rOi?M If AU-iU-jf 2..>, 1 J7o WAS^LN GE".NCf2
1 *
t 1 2 !>
5357
9 8
3U4NFI fY J'JAL ITY
tAFA SET SfO«r It AUiJST
ALL L04Li[N'JS T^flTri' AS
iitiiN CoJTAlUS 3 SJf-.*ArC
FOT4L ARcA : b.65 At^Li
0 1 3
5 J 4 . .1 3 C . 0 .
1 2
9 11?
12 23
V 1 :j 2 1 i . M 1
1 5. 13 1 S<+ 172.
2 2. j9 1 1 ISM 6.
? 2.oV ?5?3cjr}.
* 2.->v -.'313'-«.
i 2.b9 39.J76.
ij ,>.#jy 'iSSM1*.
f 2.'i9 ^-JUd.
' ..'.!j"r 1H.Z03.
/ :. «7 < 7 ..'6 5.
•" >'•/ y
' 1
^ 4L
j < ,t
> i -:v
2x>t li>73 WAQKJM bF.NEK ATING S1AT10M
f"I *M TE" SOU^C sIS
HM '^rS,2 PlH^ISfA^D 3 I ML ITS
3 10 « 0 » J L, . C J . !l 1 0 0
3^567
3«* 4b 56 6? 78
b.C 1 .5
-I. '39 .033
-1.59 .U33
-1.54 .C53
-1.17 .053
- !. . 1 7 . u J 3
-1.17 .055
-1.17 . U ,5 3
- . i r ! . 0 J 3
*UJ3
iJi><». 135. -1.7M .033
3'D. Ufc. -1.56 .033
1,1. 121. -1.36 .
-------
6 fe ? '460. 187. -1.17 .033 .33
778 3-J3. 172. -.98 .033 .33
889 6?0. 137. -.40 .033 .33
99999
ENDQUANT
/*
/C
// FIN
-260-
-------
* * * V
II JOb UiLNPS
// PVC UPS /> LhL iLUK.ll TKCL iy // I.H) TKCLlt»
// OVC 24 II L^U MM IK
// OVC 2J // LTD F )>? fU 5
// DVC 51 // VOL TrfCOUl
// LOL •WARKEN STORM 1 SCTUP CALIBRATION 5* // LFD FORT23
// DVC bl // VOL TWCQLl
// LSiL 'WArfRtN STORM 1 CDAM CALIBRATION :> • // LFD FOKT25
// CVC 51 // VOL TUC'JOl
// LOL SLSCRAT^ // LFD roKT2j
// OVC hi // VHL TUCnOl
// L6L SLSCRAT? // LTD FORT2/
// nVC bl // VOL THCQU1
// LHL SL SCR AT 8 // LTD FORT2H
// EXEC UTLNPS, I'-^CLla
/t
QUALITY
0 '} 0
Q 1 21 3t> \ 1
SULFATLS l.J 0.0 0.5'1 0.0 0 . .1 C.O il.J 0.0 U.O D.O 0.0 D.O
bULFATtb 112.0)
SL'LFATtS 212.CJ
SULFATLS 312. LJ
Tt-.S 512. C^l
SliLFATCS 612.0)
bULFATtb 712.0)
SULFATES »r:i2.Cl
c.ULFATr:$ 912.LJ
SULFATCS H-i2.'ji i;
TOTAL FL l.J 0.0 ).J 0 .Li J.J 0.0 J.O D.U O.U 0.0 0.0 O.Q
I u T A L r f 1 Q . 1 5
I u T M.. F L 2 u . 1 5
Ii. T«L KL 3 0.1 'i
ro'T;L TL ^^ti.lS
r i- T ft L f L b U . 1 5
U' T t L r L fc J . 1 5
f',;TAL FL 7 L. 15
;U-TAL Ft B L.I '3
' L T £ L F E. S C . 1 5
'".; ?^L FE 1C 0.15
i.'-VC f^NLbl i.O n.O '3.3 0 .C 0.0 U.O 3.0 0.0 O.'J D.O 0.0 D.O
i i 4 (.. A >. il S r 2
- k) r A f , L s -: z
- '•( i?. ,. ic. i
-' .•' sM'Sr. 5
^v<:' ^f. tb-: 6
•• M r,i N : s :: ?
'-1 ' ' ?, - •: 'I : ' fc
--.•:• A i.,.. s: 9
' •-'" 4' ... ; :' H'
i. ;.'-- '„'•:>"
l i- !., j'- i
L .''• i' >'. ?
J . C 3
Q.G3
;.i . L ?
3 . C ?
L.L3
w .C ?
u . r 3
G . L 5
J . li' 3
1. ')
1 . u >
i . L ')
o.o n.T c.o a.o o.o a.o u.o o.o o.o
-261-
-------
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
ALUMINUM
TC S
TUS
TDS
TUS
TLS
TJS
TDS
TPS
TDS
TDS
TDS
TSS
TSS
1SS
TSS
TSS
TSS
rss
TSS
TSS
rss
TSS
TEMPCRATUSF
Tf. MPERATJRC
3 1.0'3
<4 I.C.I
5 1 .00
6 1.03
7 1.00
9 1.0'J
10 1.0,1
i.a
1 lOO.i)
mou.o
SiOO.J
810D.fl
IQltn.'J
i.a
1 7.01)
2 7.0 )
3 7.0'J
*» 7.0Q
5 7.0r1
6 7.DJ
7 7.00
8 7.0)
9 7.f3:l
1C 7.0'1
I
2
20.
?D.
C.O ,1.J D.O 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ii. n .i.n o.o
o.n o.o o.o u.o o.o o.o o.o
TL-iPLf? ATUKi
TL -IPC^AT JWC
T: MPtK Al'Jn -
L-ST CONST fl
5
6
7
6
9
1C
20.
2C.
,2C.
n,
//
-262-
-------
MODEL RUN 4 - STORM OCT. 20, 1976
PORTLAND GENERATING STATION, PORTLAND, PA
* * * *
// JOB SSWMK
// DrfC 20 // LFD PJ^NTK
// DtfC 2'J // LFO FJHT03
// C5VC hES // LiJL iLOKJl TKCLUJ // LFU TKCLlti
// PVC 51 // VOL T.iCOUl
// LOL 'PORTLAND SSwlM* // LFQ FO*T21
// EXEC S'wIM,TMCLIb
21
LLNERATING STATION,P03TLANI,PA.,S1G«M 1-OC10BER 20,1976
2S. 2 2 7
211
211
65
!, . P 0
C .09
C.12
0.12
C.12
D.I 2
b.OO
1
2
3
S
6
7
9
33
1 i
.L
W I,
11
J. 1L
U.0*>
U. 12
U. 12
J.12
U.12
J.IJG
1
J
2
1
4,
2
i
"5
4.
i
U « i.'
1
G . i a
G.C9
0.12
U.12
0.12
0.12
O.OJ
a
i
0
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
7
99 ?.'>
v v 7 . ^
/V 7. '<
J. lu
'1.16
0. 12
a . 1 2
0.12
0.12
j.un
an « .
i
122U.
3
6 9 8 .
b
1 520.
t
7
1C
t .
>,
•^ . ».)
. JJu 5
Q.M
0.16
0 . 1 '.'.
U. 12
3.12
.J.12
u . U 0
13.5,
1 7.*»43
I.
11 .93
1.
6
3
lu.23
1.
5
i. H
i.ll
1 . i 1
1.11
J.H5 J.J5J
0.12 U.12
!).!? 0.12
U . 1 2 0.12
0.12 0.12
U.LJ3 O.CU
1
fU. .Ci>
1
3,33 .OGd
75 317
1
101. .102
.L 223
iOU. .05
7C, -4a2
.0 -452
.P'Jl
1 . 00
H . L;
DLH3
. C J 4
.Glfc
.Jib
.016
J.05 U.OIj 0.09
0. 12 iJ. 12 0.12
U. 12 0.12 0.12
0. 12 0.12 0.12
0.12 0.12 0.12
0. GO O.D'J O.'IQ
.J1C
7
.U169
. J09t
. 0 1 0
. Ou96
.18M J.OD
u . a u . ?
.ouu
.OU3
.UO 3
.OU3
0.
.t is
. f 1 5
• ni5
0.52 O.OM115
U.fi
1.61
2.09
2.U9
2.09
-263-
-------
L.L
0.0
1.
D.C U.D O.C U.O
0.0 0 .D 0.0 U.O
0.0 0.0 100.0
0 .0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.
761129.
100. 0
100.0
J.I 0.0
1.
518361.
0.0 J.O 100.0
1.
115619.
0
/*
/£
// FIN
JOB LNKPRS
DVC RES // LBL ILOK'Jl TKCL IB
PVC 20 // LFD P.JNFR
DVC 20 // LFD FJRT03
DVC 51 // VOL TRCI301
LBL 'PORTLAND SSWMM*
DVC 51 // VOL TRC001
FXT SQ,C,l,CYL,l
LBL 'PORTLAND LNKPRG.'
EXEC LNKPRG,1»CL1B
// LF!) TRCLIb
// LFD FORT21
// LFD FORT22
/'I
?1
n.o
6
2
1 1
->
1 1
22
30.
6
J
1
7
*j
I
6
7
7
10
7
ID
MN
Sf)1 TOT FE
3 12
32V7.21311130.
AL
1
-6.
90.?9'J.
/ *
/1.
5 o.U 9C29J.
FIN
297360.
b!80
616U.
TDS
TSS
200569321751787.
116810. 98818.
116810. 98818.
-264-
-------
II JOfc tJCM
// r VC kES // L VC SI // VOL T.) , 1 9 76 ,POK TL AND GLUEHATING STATION
ALL LOADINGS TREATED AS FINITE SJUKCLS
BASIN CONTAINS «* S UB CA 1C >W LN I S f 3 PlKtSiANO 2 INLETS
T( TAL AKEA - 52.97 ACWLS
0 1 0
3 Z<». . 1 JO. »).J 7 S 3.3 C.C 0.0 1 0 0
1231567
•12 3 O.I 1.5
I 3.33 93361. -3. 31 .053
2 3.05 92S322. -2.37 .033
3 3.05 7^?22. -3.>0«» .L33
4 B..J5 IJL'^^J. -3.71 .033
S u.MM 17263B. -3.2fc .033
6 5.95 71779. • Li .U .U 53
7 <4.b9 71770. -.48 .033
9
I ] 2 <4!J2.<4'4 253.23 -?.8<4 .033 .2
2 Z i t»02.U4 22<4.U9 -2.71 .033 .2
3 3 '4 2*41. ') 6 2i*b.i*3 -3.38 .033 .?
H H 5 9bb.Bij 2J8.feb -3.U9 .033 '• 2
i t b atJ^.tiB 1/6. 3b -1.63 .U33 .2
9 " 9
// f I'-
-265-
-------
// LFD FORT23
JOb UTLNPS
DVC RES // LBL iLOKOl TRCL 13
DVC 20 // LFD PtfNTR
DVC 20 // LFO FORTU3
DVC 51 // VOL TRC001
LBL fPORTLAND SETUP*
DVC 51 // VOL TRC301
LBL 'PORTLAND QUAN* // LFD FORT25
DVC 51 // VOL TtfCOOl
LBL SLSCRAT<4 // LFD FORT26
DVC 51 // VOL TRC001
LBL SLSCRAT7 // LFD FORT27
DVC 51 // VOL TKCDOl
LBL SLSCRAT8 // LTD FORT28
EXEC UTLNPS,TRCLlil
// LFD TRCLIB
/I
0
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATES
SULFATLS
SULFATES
SULFATLS
SULFATES
TOTAL FL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
T C T A L
TOTAL
TC TAL
TOTAL
QUALITY
D
1 20
FE
FE
FE
FE
FE
FE
FL
WfiNbANL'SE
HA NTiANtSC
HAN6ANESE
IfiNP ANESC
•UMGANLSC
•1ANGANESE
INJK
il
I NUM
3b
0
3
214.00
5l«* .00
614 -00
7m. 03
1.0
.50
.50
.50
.50
.50
.50
.50
1
2
1
2
3
«*
5
6
7
1
•>
A,
3
14
5
C
7
1
— -.
t
.05
• OS
.05
.OS
.05
.C5
.C5
1.0
0.5
U.5
0.5
J.5
O.b
J.5
n.s
i. J
65.
b5.
1
0.0
j.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o a.a o.a
a.a o.o o.o o.a c.o a.a o.o o.o o.a o.o o.o
o.o o.a o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o a.a o.o o.o o.o
0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 U.Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
n.n j.o o.o o.a o.o a.a o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o
-266-
-------
ins n (>i.
TLS 5 b5.
TOS t. f,5.
TPS 7 65.
1SS 1«J l-»0 J»0 0.0 T.J u.O 0.0 U.O 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0
TSS 1 15.
TSS 2 15.
TSS i 15.
TSS
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(1'leosc read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-77-199
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Sampling and Modeling of Non-Point Sources at a
Coal-Fired Utility
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
5. REPORT DATE
September 1977
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Gordon T. Brookman
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
TRC--The Research Corporation of New England
125 Silas Deane Highway
Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109
1NE624
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2133, Task 2
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Task Final: 1/76-5/77
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
15.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES jERL-RTP project officer for this report is D. Bruce Harris,
Mail Drop 62, 919/541-2557.
16. ABSTRACT
repor(. gjves results of a measurement and modeling program for non-
point sources (NPS) from two coal-fired utility plants, and the impact of NPS on
receiving waters. The field measurement survey, performed at two utility plants in
Pennsylvania, included measurement of overland runoff from NPS and river sampling
upstream and downstream of each plant site. NPS sampled were storm water runoff
and leachate from coal storage piles and runoff from impervious areas such as par-
king lots and roofs which were covered with dust fallout from coal and ash handling
operations. A mathematical model was developed to simulate both the quantity and
quality of industrial NPS pollution and its impact on receiving waters. Field data
indicated that NPS pollution from utilities had little impact on the two rivers , com-
pared to the impact from sources upstream of each site. Modeled results compared
to field measurements within a factor of 4 for both the quantity and quality of storm
water runoff and its impact on the quality of the receiving waters. Field survey
results indicate that, for a cost-effective program, sampling must be supplemented
with modeling (the modeling results indicate that the developed model can be used
with a minimum of field data to successfully simulate industrial NPS pollution and its
impact on receiving waters for the utility industry).
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Pollution
Utilities
Combustion
Coal
Coal Handling
Measurement
Mathematical Models
Runoff
Stream Pollution
Coal Storage
Leaching
Dust
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Non-Point Sources
c. COSATI Field/Group
13B
2 IB
2 ID
15E
14B
12A
08H
081
07D,07A
11G
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
275
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-268-
------- | |