4.7 Article

Assessment of design rainfall uncertainty for hydrologic engineering applications in Hong Kong

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00477-013-0774-2

Keywords

Design rainfall; Rainfall IDF; Uncertainty analysis

Funding

  1. Drainage Services Department of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hydrologic engineering designs and analyses often require the specification of design storm which involves rainfall amount, duration and hyetograph. In practice, the determination of design rainfall in hydrologic engineering applications involves the frequency analysis of extreme rainfalls of different durations and the establishment of rainfall hyetograph for the design event under consideration. Sampling errors exist in the estimation of rainfall depth (or intensity) quantiles from frequency analysis, which will be transmitted in the process of determining the design rainfall hyetograph. This paper presents a practical methodological framework based on the bootstrap resampling scheme to assess the uncertainty features associated with the magnitude of estimated rainfall depth/intensity quantiles and the corresponding design hyetographs. The procedure is implemented to quantify uncertainty of design rainfall hyetograph following the Stormwater Drainage Manual of Hong Kong involving the use of rainfall intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) model. Of particular interesting is that the bootstrap resampling scheme implemented herein is modified to handle unequal record period of annual maximum rainfall data series of different durations and to account for their intrinsic correlations. According to the adopted rainfall IDF model, the design rainfall hyetograph is a function of the IDF model coefficients. Due to the correlation among rainfall quantiles of different durations, the IDF coefficients are found to be strongly related in a nonlinear fashion which should not be ignored in the establishment of the design hyetographs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available