首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Hydrology >Performance and complementarity of two systemic models (reservoir and neural networks) used to simulate spring discharge and piezometry for a karst aquifer
【24h】

Performance and complementarity of two systemic models (reservoir and neural networks) used to simulate spring discharge and piezometry for a karst aquifer

机译:两种系统模型(储层和神经网络)的性能和互补性,用于模拟岩溶含水层的泉水流量和渗压法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Karst aquifers can provide previously untapped freshwater resources and have thus generated considerable interest among stakeholders involved in the water supply sector. Here we compare the capacity of two systemic models to simulate the discharge and piezometry of a karst aquifer. Systemic models have the advantage of allowing the study of heterogeneous, complex karst systems without relying on extensive geographical and meteorological datasets. The effectiveness and complementarity of the two models are evaluated for a range of hydrologic conditions and for three methods to estimate evapotranspiration (Monteith, a priori ET, and effective rainfall). The first model is a reservoir model (referred to as VENSIM, after the software used), which is designed with just one reservoir so as to be as parsimonious as possible. The second model is a neural network (NN) model. The models are designed to simulate the rainfall-run-off and rainfall-water level relations in a karst conduit. The Lez aquifer, a karst aquifer located near the city of Montpellier in southern France and a critical water resource, was chosen to compare the two models. Simulated discharge and water level were compared after completing model design and calibration. The results suggest that the NN model is more effective at incorporating the nonlinearity of the karst spring for extreme events (extreme low and high water levels), whereas VENSIM provides a better representation of intermediate-amplitude water level fluctuations. VENSIM is sensitive to the method used to estimate evapotranspiration, whereas the NN model is not. Given that the NN model performs better for extreme events, it is better for operational applications (predicting floods or determining water pumping height). VENSIM, on the other hand, seems more appropriate for representing the hydrologic state of the basin during intermediate periods, when several effects are at work: rain, evapotranspiration, development of vegetation, etc. A proposal for improving both models is also provided. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:岩溶含水层可以提供以前未开发的淡水资源,因此引起了供水部门利益相关者的极大兴趣。在这里,我们比较了两个系统模型模拟岩溶含水层流量和测压的能力。系统模型的优点是可以在不依赖广泛的地理和气象数据集的情况下研究异构,复杂的喀斯特系统。在一定范围的水文条件和三种估算蒸散量的方法(Monteith,先验ET和有效降雨)下,评估了两种模型的有效性和互补性。第一个模型是储层模型(在使用软件后简称为VENSIM),它仅用一个储层设计,以尽可能地简化。第二种模型是神经网络(NN)模型。这些模型旨在模拟岩溶管道中的降雨径流和降雨水位关系。 Lez蓄水层是位于法国南部蒙彼利埃市附近的岩溶含水层,并且是重要的水资源,因此我们选择了Lez蓄水层来比较这两种模型。完成模型设计和校准后,比较模拟的排放量和水位。结果表明,对于极端事件(极端的低水位和高水位),NN模型在合并岩溶泉水的非线性方面更为有效,而VENSIM可更好地表示中幅水位波动。 VENSIM对用于估算蒸散量的方法很敏感,而NN模型则不然。鉴于NN模型在极端事件中的性能更好,因此在运营应用中也更好(预测洪水或确定水泵高度)。另一方面,VENSIM似乎更适合于代表中间时期的流域水文状态,此时有以下几种作用:降雨,蒸散,植被发育等。还提出了改善这两种模型的建议。 (C)2014 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

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