Use of Doppler velocity radars to monitor and predict debris and flood wave velocities and travel times in post-wildfire basins

Abstract

The magnitude and timing of extreme events such as debris and floodflows (collectively referred to as floodflows) in post-wildfire basins are difficult to measure and are even more difficult to predict. To address this challenge, a sensor ensemble consisting of noncontact, ground-based (near-field), Doppler velocity (velocity) and pulsed (stage or gage height) radars, rain gages, and a redundant radio communication network was leveraged to monitor flood wave velocities, to validate travel times, and to compliment observations from NEXRAD weather radar. The sensor ensemble (DEbris and Floodflow Early warNing System, DEFENS) was deployed in Waldo Canyon, Pike National Forest, Colorado, USA, which was burned entirely (100 percent burned) by the Waldo Canyon fire during the summer of 2012 (MTBS, 2020).

Surface velocity, stage, and precipitation time series collected during the DEFENS deployment on 10 August 2015 were used to monitor and predict flood wave velocities and travel times as a function of stream discharge (discharge; streamflow). The 10 August 2015 event exhibited spatial and temporal variations in rainfall intensity and duration that resulted in a discharge equal to 5.01 cubic meters per second (m³/s). Discharge was estimated post-event using a slope-conveyance indirect discharge method and was verified using velocity radars and the probability concept algorithm. Mean flood wave velocities – represented by the kinematic celerity $\left(c_k=2.619meterspersecond,m/s\pm 0.556percent\right)$ and dynamic celerity $\left(c_d=3.533m/s\pm 0.181percent\right)andtheiruncertainties$ were computed. L-moments were computed to establish probability density functions (PDFs) and associated statistics for each of the at-a-section hydraulic parameters to serve as a workflow for implementing alert networks in hydrologically similar basins that lack data.

Measured flood wave velocities and travel times agreed well with predicted values. Absolute percent differences between predicted and measured flood wave velocities ranged from 1.6 percent to 49 percent and varied with water slope, hydraulic radius, and depth. The kinematic celerity was a better predictor for steep slopes and wide flood plains associated with the Upper Waldo and Middle Waldo radar streamgages; whereas, the dynamic celerity was a better surrogate for shallow slopes and incised channels such as the Lower Waldo radar streamgage.

The method demonstrates the potential extensibility of a post-wildfire warning system by (1) leveraging multiple systems (i.e., weather radar, near-field velocity and stage radars, and rain gages) for accurate and timely warnings of debris and floodflows, (2) establishing an order of operations to site, install, and operate near-field radars and conventional rain gages to record floodflows, forecast travel times, and document geomorphic change in this basin and hydrologically similar basins that lack data, and (3) communicating data operationally with the Colorado Department of Transportation engineering staff, National Weather Service forecasters, and emergency managers.