4.7 Article

Characterisation of seasonal flood types according to timescales in mixed probability distributions

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 539, 期 -, 页码 38-56

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.05.005

关键词

Flood statistics; Seasonal mixing models; Flood time scales

资金

  1. DFG [SFB 823]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When flood statistics are based on annual maximum series (AMS), the sample often contains flood peaks, which differ in their genesis. If the ratios among event types change over the range of observations, the extrapolation of a probability distribution function (pdf) can be dominated by a majority of events that belong to a certain flood type. If this type is not typical for extraordinarily large extremes, such an extrapolation of the pdf is misleading. To avoid this breach of the assumption of homogeneity, seasonal models were developed that differ between winter and summer floods. We show that a distinction between summer and winter floods is not always sufficient if seasonal series include events with different geneses. Here, we differentiate floods by their timescales into groups of long and short events. A statistical method for such a distinction of events is presented. To demonstrate their applicability, timescales for winter and summer floods in a German river basin were estimated. It is shown that summer floods can be separated into two main groups, but in our study region, the sample of winter floods consists of at least three different flood types. The pdfs of the two groups of summer floods are combined via a new mixing model. This model considers that information about parallel events that uses their maximum values only is incomplete because some of the realisations are overlaid. A statistical method resulting in an amendment of statistical parameters is proposed. The application in a German case study demonstrates the advantages of the new model, with specific emphasis on flood types. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据