Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1409
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1409
13 May 2025
 | 13 May 2025
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).

Technical Note: A double-Manning approach to compute robust rating curves and hydraulic geometries

Andrew D. Wickert, Jabari C. Jones, and Gene-Hua Crystal Ng

Abstract. Rating curves describe river discharge as a function of water-surface elevation ("stage"). They are applied globally for stream monitoring, flood-hazard prediction, and water-resources assessment. Because most rating curves are empirical, they typically require years of data collection and are easily affected by changes in channel hydraulic geometry. Here we present a straightforward strategy based on Manning's classic equation to address both of these issues. This "double-Manning" approach employs Manning's equation for flow in and above the channel. Flow across the floodplain can follow either a Manning-inspired power-law relationship or, in the common case of a rectangular floodplain and valley-wall geometry, a second application of Manning's equation analogous to that applied within the channel. When applied to ample data from established stream gauges, we can solve for Manning's n for in-channel flow, channel-bank height, and two floodplain-flow variables. When applied to limited discharge data from a field campaign, additional constraints from the surveyed floodplain cross section permit a fit to the double-Manning formulation that matches ground truth. Using these double-Manning fits, we can dynamically adjust the rating curve to account for evolution in channel width, depth, and/or slope, as well as in channel and floodplain roughness. Such rating-curve flexibility, combined with a formulation based in flow mechanics, enables predictions during times of coupled hydrologic–geomorphic change. Open-source software with example implementations is available via GitHub, Zenodo, and PyPI.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Share
Andrew D. Wickert, Jabari C. Jones, and Gene-Hua Crystal Ng

Status: open (until 04 Jul 2025)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Andrew D. Wickert, Jabari C. Jones, and Gene-Hua Crystal Ng
Andrew D. Wickert, Jabari C. Jones, and Gene-Hua Crystal Ng

Viewed

Total article views: 131 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
99 26 6 131 4 4
  • HTML: 99
  • PDF: 26
  • XML: 6
  • Total: 131
  • BibTeX: 4
  • EndNote: 4
Views and downloads (calculated since 13 May 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 13 May 2025)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 149 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 149 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 23 Jun 2025
Download
Short summary
Two common questions about water in rivers are: (1) "How high is the water?" and "How much water is moving downstream?" Measuring (1) is relatively easy and tells us if a river is flooding. Measuring (2) is relatively difficult, but links flow in the river to upstream rainfall, evaporation, and other watershed processes. Here we provide a straightforward but physically based way to translate between (1) and (2), and our method can keep working even if the river channel changes shape.
Share