scholarly journals A data-based comparison of flood frequency analysis methods used in France

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Kochanek ◽  
B. Renard ◽  
P. Arnaud ◽  
Y. Aubert ◽  
M. Lang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Gumbel Distribution ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Local Version ◽  
Simulation Approach ◽  
Ungauged Catchments ◽  
Gev Distribution ◽  
Continuous Simulation ◽  
Regional Estimation

Abstract. Flood frequency analysis (FFA) aims at estimating quantiles with large return periods for an extreme discharge variable. Many FFA implementations are used in operational practice in France. These implementations range from the estimation of a pre-specified distribution to continuous simulation approaches using a rainfall simulator coupled with a rainfall–runoff model. This diversity of approaches raises questions regarding the limits of each implementation and calls for a nation-wide comparison of their predictive performances. This paper presents the results of a national comparison of the main FFA implementations used in France. More accurately, eight implementations are considered, corresponding to the local, regional and local-regional estimation of Gumbel and Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) distributions, as well as the local and regional versions of a continuous simulation approach. A data-based comparison framework is applied to these eight competitors to evaluate their predictive performances in terms of reliability and stability, using daily flow data from more than 1000 gauging stations in France. Results from this comparative exercise suggest that two implementations dominate their competitors in terms of predictive performances, namely the local version of the continuous simulation approach and the local-regional estimation of a GEV distribution. More specific conclusions include the following: (i) the Gumbel distribution is not suitable for Mediterranean catchments, since this distribution demonstrably leads to an underestimation of flood quantiles; (ii) the local estimation of a GEV distribution is not recommended, because the difficulty in estimating the shape parameter results in frequent predictive failures; (iii) all the purely regional implementations evaluated in this study displayed a quite poor reliability, suggesting that prediction in completely ungauged catchments remains a challenge.

scholarly journals A data-based comparison of flood frequency analysis methods used in France

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 4445-4479 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Kochanek ◽  
B. Renard ◽  
P. Arnaud ◽  
Y. Aubert ◽  
M. Lang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Gumbel Distribution ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Local Version ◽  
Simulation Approach ◽  
Ungauged Catchments ◽  
Gev Distribution ◽  
Continuous Simulation ◽  
Regional Estimation

Abstract. Many flood frequency analysis (FFA) implementations are used in operational practice in France. These implementations range from the estimation of a pre-specified distribution to continuous simulation approaches using a rainfall simulator coupled with a rainfall-runoff model. This diversity of approaches raises questions regarding the optimal ambits of each implementation and calls for a nation-wide comparison of their predictive performances. This paper presents the results of a national comparison of the main FFA implementations used in France. More accurately, eight implementations are considered, corresponding to the local, regional and local-regional estimation of Gumbel and Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) distributions, as well as the local and regional estimation of a continuous simulation approach eventually resulted in a local and a regional version. A data-based comparison framework is applied to these eight competitors to evaluate their predictive performances in terms of reliability and stability, using daily flow data data from more than one thousand gauging stations in France. Results from this comparative exercise suggest that two implementations dominate their competitors in terms of predictive performances, namely the local version of the continuous simulation approach and the local-regional estimation of a GEV distribution. More specific conclusions include the following: (i) the Gumbel distribution is not suitable for Mediterranean catchments, since this distribution demonstrably leads to an underestimation of flood quantiles; (ii) the local estimation of a GEV distribution is not recommended, because the difficulty in estimating the shape parameter results in frequent predictive failures; (iii) all the purely regional implementations evaluated in this study displayed a quite poor reliability, suggesting that prediction in completely ungauged catchments remains a challenge.

scholarly journals Stochastic semi-continuous simulation for extreme flood estimation in catchments with combined rainfall–snowmelt flood regimes

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 1283-1298 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Lawrence ◽  
E. Paquet ◽  
J. Gailhard ◽  
A. K. Fleig
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Probabilistic Model ◽  
Extreme Precipitation ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Continuous Simulation ◽  
Weather Patterns ◽  
Extreme Flood ◽  
Flood Estimation

Abstract. Simulation methods for extreme flood estimation represent an important complement to statistical flood frequency analysis because a spectrum of catchment conditions potentially leading to extreme flows can be assessed. In this paper, stochastic, semi-continuous simulation is used to estimate extreme floods in three catchments located in Norway, all of which are characterised by flood regimes in which snowmelt often has a significant role. The simulations are based on SCHADEX, which couples a precipitation probabilistic model with a hydrological simulation such that an exhaustive set of catchment conditions and responses is simulated. The precipitation probabilistic model is conditioned by regional weather patterns, and a bottom–up classification procedure was used to define a set of weather patterns producing extreme precipitation in Norway. SCHADEX estimates for the 1000-year (Q1000) discharge are compared with those of several standard methods, including event-based and long-term simulations which use a single extreme precipitation sequence as input to a hydrological model, statistical flood frequency analysis based on the annual maximum series, and the GRADEX method. The comparison suggests that the combination of a precipitation probabilistic model with a long-term simulation of catchment conditions, including snowmelt, produces estimates for given return periods which are more in line with those based on statistical flood frequency analysis, as compared with the standard simulation methods, in two of the catchments. In the third case, the SCHADEX method gives higher estimates than statistical flood frequency analysis and further suggests that the seasonality of the most likely Q1000 events differs from that of the annual maximum flows. The semi-continuous stochastic simulation method highlights the importance of considering the joint probability of extreme precipitation, snowmelt rates and catchment saturation states when assigning return periods to floods estimated by precipitation-runoff methods. The SCHADEX methodology, as applied here, is dependent on observed discharge data for calibration of a hydrological model, and further study to extend its application to ungauged catchments would significantly enhance its versatility.

scholarly journals Regional flood frequency analysis of Tripura based on L-moment

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abhijit Bhuyan ◽  
Munindra Borah
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Regional Growth ◽  
Growth Curves ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Ungauged Catchments ◽  
Discharge Data ◽  
Pearson Type ◽  
Regional Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Regional Flood Frequency

The annual maximum discharge data of six gauging sites have been considered for L-moment based regional flood frequency analysis of Tripura, India. Homogeneity of the region has been tested based on heterogeneity measure (H) using method of L-moment. Based on heterogeneity measure it has been observed that the region consist of six gauging sites is homogeneous. Different probability distributions viz. Generalized extreme value (GEV), Generalized Logistic (GLO), Generalized Pareto (GPA), Generalized Normal (GNO), Pearson Type III (PE3) and Wakebay (WAK) have been considered for this investigation. PE3, GNO and GEV have been identified as the candidate distributions based on the L-moment ratio diagram and ZDIST -statistics criteria. Regional growth curves for three candidate distributions have been developed for gauged and ungauged catchments. Monte Carlo simulations technique has also been used to estimate accuracy of the estimated regional growth curves and quantiles. From simulation study it has been observed that PE3 distribution is the robust one.

scholarly journals Stochastic semi-continuous simulation for extreme flood estimation in catchments with combined rainfall-snowmelt flood regimes

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (6) ◽  
pp. 6785-6828 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Lawrence ◽  
E. Paquet ◽  
J. Gailhard ◽  
A. K. Fleig
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Probabilistic Model ◽  
Extreme Precipitation ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Continuous Simulation ◽  
Weather Patterns ◽  
Extreme Flood ◽  
Flood Estimation

Abstract. Simulation methods for extreme flood estimation represent an important complement to statistical flood frequency analysis because a spectrum of catchment conditions potentially leading to extreme flows can be assessed. In this paper, stochastic, semi-continuous simulation is used to estimate extreme floods in three catchments located in Norway, all of which are characterised by flood regimes in which snowmelt often has a significant role. The simulations are based on SCHADEX, which couples a precipitation probabilistic model with a hydrological simulation such that an exhaustive set of catchment conditions and responses are simulated. The precipitation probabilistic model is conditioned by regional weather patterns, and a "bottom-up" classification procedure was used for defining a set of weather patterns producing extreme precipitation in Norway. SCHADEX estimates for the 1000 yr (Q1000) discharge are compared with those of several standard methods, including event-based and long-term simulations which use a single extreme precipitation sequence as input to a hydrological model, with statistical flood frequency analysis based on the annual maximum series, and with the GRADEX method. The comparison suggests that the combination of a precipitation probabilistic model with a long-term simulation of catchment conditions, including snowmelt, produces estimates for given return periods which are more in line with those based on statistical flood frequency analysis, as compared with the standard simulation methods, in two of the catchments. In the third case, the SCHADEX method gives higher estimates than statistical flood frequency analysis and further suggests that the seasonality of the most likely Q1000 events differs from that of the annual maximum flows. The semi-continuous stochastic simulation method highlights the importance of considering the joint probability of extreme precipitation, snowmelt rates and catchment saturation states when assigning return periods to floods estimated by precipitation-runoff methods. The SCHADEX methodology, as applied here, is dependent on observed discharge data for calibration of a hydrological model, and further study to extend its application to ungauged catchments would significantly enhance its versatility.

Paradigm Shift in distribution preferences for Flood Frequency Analysis and the ‘LMoFit’ R-Package

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohanad Ashraf Zaghloul ◽  
Simon Michael Papalexiou ◽  
Amin Elshorbagy
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
R Package ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Shape Parameters ◽  
Gev Distribution ◽  
Economical Design ◽  
Upper Limits ◽  
Alternative Power

<p>Safe and economical design of dams, highways, bridges, and other infrastructures require accurate estimates of the magnitude and frequency of peak floods obtained by flood frequency analysis (FFA). The Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) distribution is the traditional preference for FFA along with other distributions having location, scale, and shape parameters. In this poster, two alternative power-type distributions comprising one location and two shape parameters are explored, these are Burr type III (BrIII) and Burr type XII (BrXII) distributions. The performances of BrIII and BrXII are compared against that of GEV in describing annual maximum streamflow records at 1088 sites across Canada. A generic L-moment algorithm is developed to fit these distributions regardless of the unavailability of some of their analytical L-moment expressions. This algorithm is devised in the R package “LMoFit” on CRAN. The latter comparison shows that: (1) the three distributions perform equally-well in describing the observed peaks; (2) the BrIII and the BrXII distributions predict larger streamflow peaks increasing the heaviness of their right tails compared to that of the GEV distribution; (3) the predictions of the GEV distribution reach the upper limits of the distribution in 39% of the sites, while the corresponding predictions of BrIII and BrXII are not limited and exceed the reached limits of GEV; (4) the GEV distribution might be underestimating the risk of extreme events, especially for large return periods. Accordingly, there are potential limitations in using the GEV distribution for FFA and the findings suggest BrIII and BrXII distributions as consistent alternatives for future FFA practices. The “LMoFit” R package is devised to facilitate the future application of the suggested distributions.</p>

Application of Higher Probability Weighted Moments in Flood Frequency Analysis

2012 ◽  
Vol 518-523 ◽  
pp. 4139-4143
Author(s):  
Yang Li ◽  
Song Bai Song
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Maximum Flow ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Annual Maximum ◽  
Gev Distribution ◽  
Probability Weighted Moments ◽  
Northern Shaanxi ◽  
Flood Analysis ◽  
Better Than

This paper aims to study the use of higher probability moments (PWMs) for flood frequency analysis. By estimating the parameters of GEV distribution and matching higher PWMs to annual maximum flow series in northern Shaanxi. The results show that higher PWMs describe the data reasonably better than lower PWMs in flood analysis. This method involves no more complication than lower PWMs that be commonly used, and is suitable for flood frequency analysis.

scholarly journals At Site Flood Frequency Analysis of Baitarani River at Champua Watershed, Odisha

2019 ◽  
pp. 54-64
Author(s):  
Rebati Sinam
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Analysis ◽  
Return Period ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Probability Distributions ◽  
Gumbel Distribution ◽  
Flood Frequency ◽  
Flood Frequency Analysis ◽  
Floodplain Management ◽  
Chi Squared ◽  
Anderson Darling

For any development of hydraulic structures and dam modelling, flood frequency analysis is an effective tool to determine the appropriate measures and strategy. Flood frequency analysis has been conventionally used in hydraulic engineering and floodplain management. The present study is an attempt to estimate the expected flood using two probability distributions: Gumbel distribution and Log Pearson III distribution at Champua watershed, Upper Baitarani River Basin, Odisha. The analysis is based on annual maximum flood time series from 1991 to 2018 (28 years) obtained from Water Resources Information System at the Champua gauging station. Three Goodness of fit methods namely Kolmogorov Smirnov, Anderson Darling and Chi Squared tests are used to choose the better model. From the analysis, expected flood for return period 2, 10, 25, 50, 100 and 1000 years are calculated. Gumbel give an expected flood 521.72 cumecs while Log Pearson III give an expected flood of 493.17 cumecs for 2 years return period. It is observed that Gumbel estimated a higher values for all the said return period except for 1000 years where Log Pearson III predicted a much higher values. Goodness of test show inconsistent results. While Chi-squared test indicate Gumbel Method as the better model, the other two tests show that Log Pearson III is the better fitting model for the given dataset. Therefore, Log Pearson III is chosen as the best model. However, the results from both the distributions can be referred for storm management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document