John Thomas Wilson 2000 <p>A mathematical technique of estimating low-flow frequencies from base-flow measurements was evaluated by using data for streams in Indiana. Low-flow frequencies at low-flow partial-record stations were estimated by relating base-flow measurements to concurrent daily flows at nearby streamflow-gaging stations (index stations) for which low-flow- frequency curves had been developed. A network of long-term streamflow-gaging stations in Indiana provided a sample of sites with observed low-flow frequencies.Observed values of 7-day, 10-year low flow and 7-day, 2-year low flow were compared to predicted values to evaluate the accuracy of the method.</p><p>Five test cases were used to evaluate the method under a variety of conditions in which the location of the index station and its drainage area varied relative to the partial-record station. A total of 141 pairs of streamflow-gaging stations were used in the five test cases. Four of the test cases used one index station, the fifth test case used two index stations. The number of base-flow measurements was varied for each test case to see if the accuracy of the method was affected by the number of measurements used.</p><p>The most accurate and least variable results were produced when two index stations on the same stream or tributaries of the partial-record station were used. All but one value of the predicted 7-day, 10-year low flow were within 15 percent of the values observed for the long-term continuous record, and all of the predicted values of the 7-day, 2-year low-flow were within 15 percent of the observed values. This apparent accuracy, to some extent, may be a result of the small sample set of 15.</p><p>Of the four test cases that used one index station, the most accurate and least variable results were produced in the test case where the index station and partial-record station were on the same stream or on streams tributary to each other and where the index station had a larger drainage area than the partial-record station. In that test case, the method tended to over predict, based on the median relative error. In 23 of 28 test pairs, the predicted 7-day, 10-year low flow was within 15 percent of the observed value; in 26 of 28 test pairs, the predicted 7-day, 2-year low flow was within 15 percent of the observed value.</p><p>When the index station and partial- record station were on the same stream or streams tributary to each other and the index station had a smaller drainage area than the partial-record station, the method tended to under predict the low-flow frequencies. Nineteen of 28 predicted values of the 7-day, 10-year low-flow were within 15 percent of the observed values. Twenty-five of 28 predicted values of the 7-day, 2-year low flow were within 15 percent of the observed values.</p><p>When the index station and the partial- record station were on different streams, the method tended to under predict regardless of whether the index station had a larger or smaller drainage area than that of the partial-record station. Also, the variability of the relative error of estimate was greatest for the test cases that used index stations and partial-record stations from different streams. This variability, in part, may be caused by using more streamflow-gaging stations with small low-flow frequencies in these test cases. A small difference in the predicted and observed values can equate to a large relative error when dealing with stations that have small low-flow frequencies.</p><p>In the test cases that used one index station, the method tended to predict smaller low-flow frequencies as the number of base- flow measurements was reduced from 20 to 5. Overall, the average relative error of estimate and the variability of the predicted values increased as the number of base-flow measurements was reduced.</p> application/pdf 10.3133/wri004063 en U.S. Geological Survey Evaluation of a Method of Estimating Low-Flow Frequencies from Base-Flow Measurements at Indiana Streams reports