首页> 美国政府科技报告 >Comparison of Peak-Flow Estimation Methods for Small Drainage Basins in Maines; Scientific investigations rept
【24h】

Comparison of Peak-Flow Estimation Methods for Small Drainage Basins in Maines; Scientific investigations rept

机译:缅甸小流域盆地峰值流量估算方法的比较2。科学调查工作

获取原文

摘要

Understanding the accuracy of commonly used methods for estimating peak streamflows is important because the designs of bridges, culverts, and other river structures are based on these flows. Different methods for estimating peak streamflows were analyzed for small drainage basins in Maine. For the smallest basins, with drainage areas of 0.2 to 1.0 square mile, nine peak streamflows from actual rainfall events at four crest-stage gaging stations were modeled by the Rational Method and the Natural Resource Conservation Service TR-20 method and compared to observed peak flows. The Rational Method had a root mean square error (RMSE) of -69.7 to 230 percent (which means that approximately two thirds of the modeled flows were within -69.7 to 230 percent of the observed flows). The TR-20 method had an RMSE of -98.0 to 5,010 percent. Both the Rational Method and TR-20 underestimated the observed flows in most cases. For small basins, with drainage areas of 1.0 to 10 square miles, modeled peak flows were compared to observed statistical peak flows with return periods of 2, 50, and 100 years for 17 streams in Maine and adjoining parts of New Hampshire. Peak flows were modeled by the Rational Method, the Natural Resources Conservation Service TR-20 method, U.S. Geological Survey regression equations, and the Probabilistic Rational Method.

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