首页> 外文会议>Floods, from Defence to Management Symposium Proceedings >Uncertainty in evaluating peak discharges of extreme floods
【24h】

Uncertainty in evaluating peak discharges of extreme floods

机译:评估洪灾高峰流量的不确定性

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

In 1997 and 2002 there were floods in the Czech Republic with peak discharges that in manycases exceeded the currently stated values of Q100.During the flood in 2002, at 15 dam reservoirs the peak dischargesreached values that significantly exceeded the design discharge values.This meant that water passedthrough the bottom outlets and mainly over the safety spillways, after reaching a level in the dam reservoir thathad not been allowed for in the project parameters.The dams and their outlets and safety spillways, however, have represented and will probably continue to representthe main monitoring profiles where the value of peak discharges can be most reliably estimated, both inreal time during a flood event and during subsequent evaluation of the flood.During the extreme flood in 2002,the gauging stations on many of the tributaries flowing into the dam reservoirs were destroyed or were put out ofoperation (instruments malfunctioned or were destroyed, power supply failed, stations were inaccessible).The totalinflow therefore formed a major basis for determining the discharges into the dam reservoirs during the courseof the flood.This inflow is evaluated from the increase or decrease in the volume of water in the reservoir in agiven time unit – most frequently one hour – and thus expresses the total average inflow into the reservoir withinthis time unit.The values of the runoffs from the dam reservoirs and the total inflows into the reservoirs are thencompared with the results from other methods, in particular with discharges estimated by the "slope-area"method.These results mostly came from determining the course of the peak discharge water level obtained fromthe after-flood traces.Using three real cases, this paper shows the uncertainties in evaluating the results of peakdischarge using different evaluating methods.There are uncertainties at the overflow on the spillway of theHusinec dam on the Blanice river, uncertainties in evaluating the total peak inflow of the Orlik dam reservoirs,and further uncertainties in determining the peak discharges on the Blanice river upstream and downstreamfrom Husinec dam.With the help of these examples, the paper concludes with a presentation of differences inthe presentation of peak discharges from the way in which they are stated in the final report on the flood event(Ministry of Environment of the Czech Republic, 2003).
机译:在1997年和2002年,捷克共和国发生了洪灾,洪灾排放高峰在许多国家 案例超过了当前规定的Q100值.2002年的洪水期间,在15个大坝水库中,洪峰流量达到峰值 达到明显超过设计排放值的值,这意味着水通过了 在到达大坝水库的水位之后,穿过底部的出水口并主要通过安全溢洪道 项目参数中不允许使用。 但是,大坝及其出口和安全溢洪道已经代表并且可能会继续代表 可以最可靠地估计峰值放电值的主要监测曲线 在洪灾事件和随后的洪灾评估期间实时显示。在2002年的特大洪灾期间, 流入大坝水库的许多支流的计量站被摧毁或被排除在外 操作(仪器故障或损坏,电源故障,无法访问工作站)。总计 因此,流入量是确定河道中向大坝水库排放量的主要依据。 洪水的流入是根据水库中水库中水量的增加或减少来评估的 给定的时间单位-通常是一小时-从而表示在此时间内流入储层的平均总流量 然后计算大坝水库的径流量值和流入水库的总流入量 与其他方法的结果相比,尤其是“坡地”估算的流量 这些结果主要来自确定从 利用三个实际案例,本文显示了评估峰结果的不确定性 排放采用不同的评估方法。溢洪道溢流处存在不确定性 布兰尼丝河上的侯赛内克大坝,评估Orlik大坝水库总峰值入水的不确定性, 在确定布兰妮斯河上游和下游的洪峰流量时存在进一步的不确定性 在这些示例的帮助下,本文最后介绍了不同方面的差异。 洪灾最终报告中峰值流量的表达方式 (捷克共和国环境部,2003年)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号