...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Hydrology >Runoff models and flood frequency statistics for design flood estimation in Austria - Do they tell a consistent story?
【24h】

Runoff models and flood frequency statistics for design flood estimation in Austria - Do they tell a consistent story?

机译:用于奥地利设计洪水估算的径流模型和洪水频率统计数据-它们讲的故事一致吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Design floods for a given location at a stream can be estimated by a number of approaches including flood frequency statistics and the design storm method. If applied to the same catchment the two methods often yield quite different results. The aim of this paper is to contribute to understanding the reasons for these differences. A case study is performed for 10 alpine catchments in Tyrol, Austria, where the 100-year floods are estimated by (a) flood frequency statistics and (b) an event based runoff model. To identify the sources of the differences of the two methods, the 100-year floods are also estimated by (c) Monte Carlo simulations using a continuous runoff model. The results show that, in most catchments, the event based model gives larger flood estimates than flood frequency statistics. The reasons for the differences depend on the catchment characteristics and different rainfall inputs that were applied. For catchments with a high storage capacity the Monte Carlo simulations indicate a step change in the flood frequency curve when a storage threshold is exceeded which is not captured by flood frequency statistics. Flood frequency statistics therefore tends to underestimate the floods in these catchments. For catchments with a low storage capacity or significant surface runoff, no step change occurs, but in three catchments the design storms used were larger than those read from the IDF (intensity duration frequency) curve leading to an overestimation of the design floods. Finally, also the correct representation of flood dominating runoff components was shown to influence design flood results. Geologic information on the catchments was essential for identifying the reasons for the mismatch of the flood estimates.
机译:可以通过多种方法来估算流中给定位置的设计洪水,包括洪水频率统计和设计风暴方法。如果将其应用于同一流域,这两种方法通常会产生完全不同的结果。本文的目的是帮助理解这些差异的原因。对奥地利蒂罗尔州的10个高山流域进行了案例研究,其中通过(a)洪水频率统计和(b)基于事件的径流模型估算了100年的洪水。为了确定两种方法差异的根源,还使用连续径流模型通过(c)蒙特卡洛模拟估算了100年的洪水。结果表明,在大多数流域,基于事件的模型提供的洪水估计要比洪水频率统计更大。差异的原因取决于集水区特征和所采用的不同降雨输入。对于具有高存储容量的集水区,蒙特卡洛模拟表明,当超出存储阈值时,洪水频率统计数据无法捕获洪水频率曲线中的阶跃变化。因此,洪水频率统计往往低估了这些流域的洪水。对于蓄水能力低或地表径流量大的流域,不会发生阶跃变化,但是在三个流域中,使用的设计暴雨大于从IDF(强度持续时间频率)曲线读取的暴雨,从而导致高估了设计洪水。最后,还显示了洪水占主导地位的径流分量的正确表示方式会影响设计洪水的结果。流域的地质信息对于确定洪水估算不匹配的原因至关重要。

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