HEC-HMS versus TR-20 and HEC-1 2

[danryan]

I'd like to quiz the board on opinions regarding HEC-HMS. I went to a class on it about 4 years ago and the version we learned on was very buggy, so much so that the instructor suggested sticking to what we used.

Is the current version stable enough and will it reproduce results with the predictability of the older, tried and true programs like TR-20 and HEC-1? I am training several engineers in my office on drainage projects and need to decide what programs to standardize on. I hate to put them through having to learn to text edit input files and run DOS programs if the clean GUI program works.

I have seen the light on HEC-RAS and we have standardized on that although personally I am still fond of HEC-2. Can you be a dinosaur and under 35 at the same time?

 

[RWF7437]

Dan,

You may want to consider a program called SMADA. It is similar to, but much easier to use than SWMM. It is also much easier to learn than HEC-HMS. Finally, its cheap by comparison.

Here's more info from the authors:

"
The SMADA programs were written to accompany the textbook
Hydrology: Water Quantity and Quality Control 2nd Edition by
M.P. Wanielista, R. Kersten, and R. Eaglin. The text is
available from John Wiley and Sons publishers.

http://www.wiley.com/

A manual for the computer programs is available
by sending a check or money for $95.00
(made out to R. Eaglin) to (Non-US orders should
add $20 foreign shipping cost):

SMADA Manual c/o Ron Eaglin
1155 Elm Street
Oviedo, FL 32765

Support for this software is through e-mail only,
questions should be sent to:

eaglin@magicnet.net

The documentation contains information on;

Using SMADA
SMADA Theory
Using TCALC
Using REGRESS
Using DISTRIB
Using EZMAT

Consulting services are available and inquiries can be made to
the e-mail address shown above."

 

[francesca]

I have not used HEC-HMS for more than five minutes, but I have used HEC-1 and it's a nightmare.

The latest version of HEC-HMS predates WinXP SP2, and I've heard of problems with HEC-HMS on SP2, but the new version of HEC-HMS shouldn't be far away.

I've used HEC-RAS in anger many times, and I'm reasonably impressed with the Corps of Engineers' software. I suggest using HEC-HMS. HEC-1 may be palatable to someone who used Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS and is used to deciphering text files, but the Windows generation may struggle with it.

If you want to save some training, you can wait until they release version 3.0, as the difference may be significant. The draft user manual has been available since late October and the release candidate software has been sent to the Beta testers, so it shouldn't be much more of a wait.

 

[danryan]

Thanks for the input. I re-read my message and noticed I didn't list what I use now. TR-20 and HEC-1 are both my personal choices for programs (TR-20 slightly preferable but less flexible for me) but I hate to subject what francesca called the "Windows generation" to a DOS program like these are.

I'm reluctant to switch formats although I did use XP-SWMM for wastewater modeling long ago (7+ years) and am familiar with the SWMM models.

I will give HMS a try on a couple of projects side by side with my runs and see how it does.

 

[Bayou]

I will suggest that you train your engineers in HEC-HMS. It really isn't that difficult and the stability issues are being worked out by the Corps. Of course RAS had the same issues prior to the version 3 releases. The biggest advantages of HMS is the acceptance of the program by FEMA, USACE and most local agencies.
Also ESRI has been working with the Corps to integrate the program with ARCGIS. GeoHEC-HMS has been released for years for use with ARCView 3.3. The integration into V.8 & V.9 has been slower, but beta programs are available from ESRI. An official release is probably planned for 2006.
However the best advantage of HMS is the price.

 

[ashhafPE]

I have a different experience with HEC-HMS. I had the training. I liked the software. Once I completed the training, I had a better understanding on how to use it. Only problem I have is, I do not agree with the results I am getting. The Q's are too big. However, I think this problem could be in our area only (South Texas). The new w.s. elevations using Hec-Ras are not realistic compared to old data and I think that goes back to Q. This is an issue in this area and consultants, city, state ...everyone has a different opinion and no one agrees with each other.

Good Luck

 

[danryan]

Thanks for the comment. That is my primary fear, that results will not reproduce from what I could hand tabulate or using HEC-1 or TR-20. Those were the kind of issues we saw in the first releases and I thought they were resolved by now.